The Failure of Programs & Plans

No, I said you don''t need anymore help by people trying to make you look like an asshole. People have made up their minds about it already. At least I have.

For those tracking statistics, that''s three dodges of a direct question, and twice calling me an asshole. Now,that''show you uphold the spirit of the forums!

The reason we have a higher crime rate than other industrialized nations is because we have a non-integrated minority that has been self-destructing in one way or another for 40 years. Find a way to stabilize and integrate the black community and most of our crime problem disappears.

That is an innaccurate statement. You are blaming the black community, both for causing and for not dealing with the crime problem. You also say that crime will mostly end if the black community ""integrates."" What do you mean by that and who should they integrate with? And what about the other major minority? Are Latinos not ""integrated""? You offered to clarify when asked, so clarify.

That is an innaccurate statement. You are blaming the black community, both for causing and for not dealing with the crime problem

First of all, where did I claim that? Quote please. Also, I still don''t know what you think is inaccurate. You claim I place the blame for black crime on the black community. If that is inaccurate, who then is to blame?

I''ll get to your question about latinos, but simply telling me that something is inaccurate isn''t much of an argument (you might as well have just said, ""nuh-uh!"") - I would really like to know what you are basing your statement on.

The reason we have a higher crime rate than other industrialized nations is because we have a non-integrated minority that has been self-destructing in one way or another for 40 years. Find a way to stabilize and integrate the black community and most of our crime problem disappears.

So you believe the black community is wholly to blame for crime committed by its membership? The fact that you have so narrowly and simplisticly assigned blame is what troubles me, especially when root causes of problems such as this are more complex in real life. To simply say that the community is to blame is innacurate.

Hispanics are the largest minority in the US, having passed the black population in the last census. And, arguably, they possess greater impediments to success than blacks. Many Hispanics do not speak English, or speak English as a second language (a problem Blacks don''t have). And yet, the crime rate performed by Latinos is a fraction of that performed by Blacks.

The fact that Hispanics have many of the same problems (education, income levels), and in some cases even more (language), and yet have a fraction of the crime rate only proves Ral''s point. The one major difference between Hispanics and Blacks is the strength of the family structure: Hispanics have it, and Blacks don''t. Blacks are roughly 20% more likely to have a child out of wedlock than Whites or Hispanics. Blacks are almost 25% more likely to not be married or get divorced than Whites or Hispanics.

The strongest indicator that someone will be a career criminal is the lack of a father figure in childhood. 72% of all career criminals came from households without a father present. So, back to Ral''s statement, figure out how to solve that problem, and you solve the disproportionate crime rate from Blacks.

I could go on, but I''ve got to do some work...

"JohnnyMoJo" wrote:

The fact that Hispanics have many of the same problems (education, income levels), and in some cases even more (language), and yet have a fraction of the crime rate only proves Ral''s point. The one major difference between Hispanics and Blacks is the strength of the family structure: Hispanics have it, and Blacks don''t. Blacks are roughly 20% more likely to have a child out of wedlock than Whites or Hispanics. Blacks are almost 25% more likely to not be married or get divorced than Whites or Hispanics.

Is there anything to directly connect crime and family problems as in ""If A happens, B happens""? Coincidence does not necessarily equate causation. Just look at video games (or gun ownership, if you like) and school violence; researchers have tried to blame the latter on the former, but I''d think people who attend a site that exalts the former would look at that assertion with a little more scrutiny.

So you believe the black community is wholly to blame for crime committed by its membership?

Again, where did I say this? I ak you to tell me where I said it before, and all you do is repeat yourself. Just so you know, you saying it twice doesn''t mean I said it once.

The fact that you have so narrowly and simplisticly assigned blame is what troubles me

Which might have the slightest validity, if I had assigned blame.

To simply say that the community is to blame is innacurate.

Well, since you are so sure that the communityisn''tto blame, who is?

Well, since you are so sure that the communityisn''tto blame, who is?

Well, since you are so sure that the communityisn''tto blame, who is?

(you''re going to make me repeat myself at least three times - I thought I''d get it out of the way :D)

There have been numerous studies showing the linkages between fatherlessness and both crime and poverty.

Children raised in single-parent households (of any race) are four times as likely to be abused or neglected (Chronicles, May 1989). They are much likelier to have trouble academically and twice as likely to drop out of school (Taylor, Paved with Good Intentions). Seventy percent of all young people in state reform institutions were raised in fatherless homes, as were 60 percent of rapists, 72 percent of adolescent murderers and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates (Conservative Chronicle, August 1994).

In 1959, only 2 percent of black children were reared in households in which the mother never married. Today, that rate approaches 60 percent. There is a huge correlation between fatherlessness in the black community and the crime rates of the that group. Like it or not, there is a link.

But is the link causation, though? It could be just a symptom of the ultimate cause...

But is the link causation, though? It could be just a symptom of the ultimate cause...

Which would be what?

A tiny percentage of poor people steal, and ivory tower elitists make it gospel that ""poverty causes crime"". Fatherlessness has a 60-70% correlation, and you scratch your head at the idea that there might be a connection.

Amazing.

But is the link causation, though? It could be just a symptom of the ultimate cause...

Which is?

Does coming from a fatherless household cause one to commit crime?

Does coming from a fatherless household cause one to commit crime?

Nope. Not having morals does. Thanks for bringing it home.

Not having morals does.

Define ""morals.""

Define ""morals.""

Did you forget how to use dictionary.com?

morals - Rules or habits of conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong.

Are you going to answer any questions yourself, or are you finally going to let me do your thinking? (I vote for the latter)

Who do you feel issues the ""rules or habits of conduct""?

Does coming from a fatherless household cause one to commit crime?

Are you making a point? What is the ''ultimate cause'' that you reference? Since you asked for sources, which I provided, and then you ignored in favor of this ''ultimate cause'', I am dying to know what it is. Please educate me.

Are you making a point?

Yes I am and if you''d be a little more cooperative we''d get there quicker. What causes fatherless households?

Edit: Let me speed this up a little. Assuming that you''d blame fatherless households on a lack of morals and you''d define morals the same way ral did, who issues morals to a society or community?

"Rat Boy" wrote:
Are you making a point?

Yes I am and if you''d be a little more cooperative we''d get there quicker. What causes fatherless households?

Edit: Let me speed this up a little. Assuming that you''d blame fatherless households on a lack of morals and you''d define morals the same way ral did, who issues morals to a society or community?

Well, for now, you can treat where the morals came from as a moot point and just focus on the ""biggies"" that everyone (unless they are psychopathic) tends to aggree on.

Theft = bad
Murder = bad
Violent Crime = bad

You could say that people who commit these acts lack the moral discipline to adhere to the most base level of moral common ground. Hence, lacking in morals.

But, morals are not something taught easily if not instilled in childhood. Fathers teach their children right and wrong, how to be a responsible adult. Most violent offenders are male. That would lead me to postulate that they lacked a role model for becoming a responsible man. A father''s impact on his children is severely underestimated even by most fathers that care deeply about their children.

Or.... we could just continue this conversation: Is there such a thing as right and wrong?. Although, lawyeron killed the thread in the end

"BrokenCrayon" wrote:

Fathers teach their children right and wrong, how to be a responsible adult.

Exclusively? Are there not any other educators of morality for children?

Sure, there are other factors, other educators. But the impact that the presence of a father or the absence of the same cannot be underestimated. The absence of a father can be devistating on many levels, and I don''t think that other avenues of education can make up for that easily, especially in our established systems.

There are so many factors, so many shortfalls to accomodate for. Sure it''s possible to fill that void, but it''s very difficult, especially in our enlightened society where being a single mother is OK and even a better thing in some people''s minds. Raising children alone means less time spent with them (more absenteeism), more stress and less care and teaching. That''s no way to raise children (my heart goes out to single mothers), and entirely irresponsible and selfish on the father''s part.

Back on topic,

''war on poverty'', rent-controls, welfare, social security, government sponsored heath care, affirmative action, sex education in schools, ''progressive learning'' in schools, etc

all contribute to the father''s ability to ditch his wife and children. It softens the consequences, paints the father a victim of society, and justifies his poor decision because, ""they''ll be alright, the government will just take care of them, they won''t starve.""

The absence of a father can be devistating on many levels, and I don''t think that other avenues of education can make up for that easily, especially in our established systems.

That absence, is it solely from divorce? Could it be, for instance, work-related?

That absence, is it solely from divorce? Could it be, for instance, work-related?

He really doesn''t have a point.

I don''t blame Fatherlessness on lack of morals, although I am sure that has some contribution.

I do find it interesting that the rise in broken homes among black families began soon after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. I also find it interesting that as social programs aimed at ''helping'' blacks have risen, so has the rate of single-parent households.

So, again I ask, do you have a point?

His point is: It takes a village to raise a child.

JMJ and BC are trying to prove that a lack of fathers causes crimes; I do not believe that the correlation between crime rates and father rates equals causation. Ral says that crime, by extension crime from the black community, comes from a lack of morals; he would be right save but for one little fact: African Americans are among the most devoutly religious ethnicity in America, even moreso than whites in some regards according to this. Has it not been said that God alone decides what is wrong? How is it that the most devoutly faithful ethnicity can have such a morality problem?

I''m surprised you conservatives didn''t say this before, what with persons of your ilk railing against those that say they are blameless because Daddy beat them as a child. It all comes down to personal choice. Dad, God, poverty, social inequity, they all play factors, but none are the single factor and in the end, the crook decides to do the crime, not their father, not their God, not their wallet, and not Crazy Old Whitey. That''s my point. That''s what I was trying to get you to say. Broad social issues such as this are never attributable to just one single cause. I guess this was just too broad of a topic for some people. Next.

Did you hear that guys? Rat thinks you are stupid. Good argument Rat, although feel free not to waste our time for 20 posts next go-''round.

It all comes down to personal choice. Dad, God, poverty, social inequity, they all play factors, but none are the single factor and in the end, the crook decides to do the crime, not their father, not their God, not their wallet, and not Crazy Old Whitey.

And they make that choice because they lack morals. Thank you for taking this much effort to agree with the very first thing I said.

Sheesh.

I''m surprised you conservatives didn''t say this before, what with persons of your ilk railing against those that say they are blameless because Daddy beat them as a child.

Huh?

And you completely ignored my point that fatherlessness as a cause of criminal behavior is true across all races, not just blacks. So yes, I feel comfortable that sufficient research has been done to prove that fatherlessness is a contributing cause of criminal activity. Yes, it boils down to a choice made by an individual. But the grounding that individual has to rely on when making their choice is severely limited when that person was raised without the benefit of a two-parent household.

Given that Blacks have had ever-increasing rates of single-parents, and a matching increase in criminal activity, it merely reinforces my point.

So, since your rebuttal consists of saying that the individual is solely responsible for their behavior, which I agree with. Now, I have said that this behavior is caused by a lack of moral grounding that is provided in a two-parent home. Since you rebut that, are you implying that the individual choice is made out of some defect in the person? So, does that mean that in your eyes, blacks are more defective than whites or hispanics?