Loose morals costs NZ $1b a year

I have the answer for all 3 problems here.

1. We need to teach the fine woman of this country that just because your married doesnt give you the right to refuse your man sex. They will just go elsewhere to find it.

2. Teenage pregnancy is a major concern but the fact is its because of a conspiracy. Durex are making osmotic condoms so that they are actually not working at all. This is not publicised but i have my very reliable sources.

3. Solo Parents are in the majority women. This is because of the biased nature of the family court. Why give custody to a woman who has no chance of getting into a high paid job because of her gender. allow the man to take custody he will look after them, he may neglect them for a cheap root but will support them.

Thank you thats Kyung Illman out.

Sorry kiwi chick, didn't read much of the posts but I saw yours. God is not mocked??? Are you serious? God is a little like the tooth fairy, except the tooth fairy actually does something.

I actually enjoy mocking god, it's bloody funny how uptight people get about something that exists in their head.

Will post this, then read the other posts. If I have mis understood you, I apologise.

I don't need to mock god, you're doing a fine enough job of that all by yourself. I do feel sorry for poor old god though, being used as a justification for bigotry and hatred by the likes of you and Bob McCoskrie. Well, I would, except he doesn't exist.

Voltaire

Pahahahaha

Is that that French Arrogant imbicile that proclaimed from his House that the Bible and Christianity would be a myth of Yesteryear in a hundred Years

Pahahahahahaha

And NOW

The Bible is the most Common read Bokk

Even

In Communist Atheistic CHINA!

Pahahahaha

Where the Christians Exceed by perecntage Even those in New Zealand

Pahahahahahaha.

Where Bibles not drugs are what they capture at customs

Pahahahahahaha

And Do you Missuer Voltaire Know what your Dead Names sake's house is today???

'The International Bible Society'

Pahahahahahahaha Pahahhaahahahahahahaha Pahahahahahaahha

God and I Laugh at you!!!

Pahahahaahahaha

Because

God

Paha

IS

Paha

Not

Paha

MOCKED!!!

Pahahahaha!!!

As Usual;

The Bull-cr-ap is spouted out in the first few Posts (almost with out exception from some state funded Labour Party Pawns PC)

The truth the intelligence flows out in the later posts where credentials are cited, FACTs are stated and intelligence flows.

Sick To Death!!! of the Labour Party Drones who Hate truth, Facts and anything Good or that which has any aspect of Responsibility for ones own actions. Die Labore I am Sick to Death!!! of your Life Destroying C rap.

We have more fatherless children in New Zealand than at any time during WW1, the Spanish Flu, WW2 or any other time. It is costing the tax payer a huge amount of money. We should have rational discussions about this. Unfortunately it is only the Religious Right that are brave enough to speak up about it. Or perhaps they are the only ones the media gives air time to.

Ronald Rohner and Robert Veneziano examined nearly 100 studies that explore the effect of parenting on children's behavior. (December 2001) A father's love - or lack of it - is a critical yet understudied factor in child development, according to research by Rohner and his colleague Robert Veneziano, an assistant professor of social work at Western Connecticut State University. "What we find surprising and new is that a father's love is turning out to be just as important as, and sometimes more important than, a mother's love," Rohner says. Fathers are cited more than mothers in issues such as psychological maladjustment, substance abuse, depression, and conduct problems, says Rohner, a professor emeritus. On the positive side, a father's love provides a buffer against the development of these difficulties and can contribute to a child's good physical health.

Other studies have shown that children raised by 2 parents have far better outcomes. The long term costs of solo parenting to society in purely monetary terms is high indeed. Poverty is not a factor in itself. Poverty simply reflects a higher likelihood of solo parent children.

Cheri A. Vogel; Robert H. Bradley; Helen H. Raikes; Kimberly Boller; Jeffrey K. Shears (Januray 2006) Studied 1,930 children. They reported that a consistent biological father presence was associated with positive child developmental outcomes. Poverty did not appear to be a relevant factor in itself.

I find it hard to believe that the breakdown of the traditional family unit is only costing $1b per year. That figure seems exceptionally low when you consider the well researched negative outcomes for fatherless children. I'd like to read the actual study.

Not bad, could E.J.M not do it on his own?

PJ, I presume that your "anthropological perspective" of the family is based on an androphobic, social construct that is based on the ideological exclusion of men from families, as it ignores the reality that a child's natural protector and provider, a fact that is distasteful to current pervading ideology.