The people who did the study advocate greater government support of families. I say that, other than a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, government should stay the heck away from families. That's not government's role, and it's not good at it.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
No need to fear government if you're doing it right. :)
--Ray
That's not actually true, Ray. I know of a case, for instance, where a typically rebelious teenage girl decided to falsely accuse her stepfather of sexual abuse because he didn't allow her to do something (I forget what it was, but it was something trivial like staying out too late). It didn't matter that she latter recanted, that her mother said that such a thing never happened, that the other children said that such a thing never happened. He was not allowed near his family again, even though he still had to support them.
The whole "you have nothing to fear if you're doing nothing wrong" argument is facetious.
-- Edited by arbilad at 20:35, 2008-04-17
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
Not government managed, tested and approved families. What you need is a bunch of intellectuals and elected officials managing your children for you, so that you can get a job to pay for your children's therapy.
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
