Buckley contra contraception, 1984
Bring back the scarlet letter
National Review, Sept 21, 1984 by William F. Buckley, Jr.
THE PERMISSIVENESS of which modern liberals are so proud turns out, in situation after situation, to usher in circumstances liberals--and others--deplore; and so it is time now to check on your hierarchies and integrate our thinking.
During the past twenty years, erotic and pornographic books and magazines have become universal. It is as easy to buy Penthouse as the Wall Street Journal.
During the past twenty years, information about birth control has become quite generally available. Moreover, technological achievements, most notably The Pill, have made the control of pregnancies easier. Indeed, the word went out that The Pill in and of itself was the great emancipator of women.
During the past twenty years we have had an organized national war against poverty, to use the martial metaphor so often used. Whereas the military budget, twenty years ago, was twice the size of the welfare budget, now it is the other way around.
Now, what has happened, as a result of all these blessings?
At one level of permissiveness we have rampant homosexuality. This would appear to mean that whereas twenty years ago homosexuals were encouraged in continent behavior, no such self-discipline is any longer a part of the governing ethos. One result of this is a new and fatal disease, AIDS--which torments homosexuals primarily--plus other venereal diseases.
At the level of heterosexual experience, the result has been an extraordinary rise in illegitimate births. Surely, given the abundance, variety, and ubiquitousness of birth-control information, there should flow a sharp diminution in accidental pregnancies. But this didn't happen. In New York City, out-of-wedlock births are one-third of the total. In Harlem, 80 per cent. In Newark, 60 per cent. In Baltimore, 58 per cent.
Well, what about poverty?
In 1965, 17 per cent of Americans were "poor." By equivalent standards, today 15.2 per cent are poor. So the figures would appear to tell us that after the expenditure of perhaps a trillion dollars, the poverty level was reduced by only two percentage points. But then we note that in 1974--ten years ago--the poverty level had sunk to 11 per cent. And the figures are not entirely reliable, given that the poverty census-takers don't count non-monetary forms of income. If these were counted--such things as food stamps, and subsidized housing and medical care--poverty would be cut almost in half, to 8.8 per cent. Still, there are a lot of poor people, when you consider how much money we are spending toward the eradication of poverty.
Comes now the integration of these phenomena. Is there a correlation between illegitimate births and poverty? Answer: Yes, there is. If you are illegitimate, you probably will be reared in poverty.
What is it that brought about the twin conditions?
Dr. Sol Blumenthal, the New York City Health Department's director of biostatistics, informs the New York Times that the growth in illegitimacy is owing to a shift in society's attitudes toward the idea of having children out of marriage and to the lessened stigma attached to out-of-wedlock children, to quote a story by Joseph Berger. "People who were in that class were once held to ridicule and abuse," Dr. Blumenthal said. But now, "if there is no father around, there's nothing to berate anybody about," because in some neighborhoods a majority of the births are out of wedlock.
and the second reason? Dr. Blumenthal says that--to quote the story--"society has cushioned the blows of having children outside marriage by providing welfare payments and day-care programs."
So let us look the facts in the face, as Walter Mondale and Mrs. Ferraro are not doing, preferring instead to attribute high rates of poverty to Ronald Reagan, whom they may as well get mad at for not having any illegitimate children, proving that he does not have the common touch.
1. Sexual permissiveness has caused a rise in disease and death.
2. Sexual permissiveness has caused a rise in illegitimacy.
3. Illegitimacy has caused a rise in proverty.
4. The general availability of birth-control information has caused a rise in illegitimacy.
5. Liberal approaches to social life have really hit the jackpot: reduced morals, betrayed children, disease, and poverty. Nice going, gang. What's the next welfare trillion going to do for us?
It's not just the ideologically-driven cherrypicking of facts (or even "facts") that isn't new.
Later on I'll have some more pro-theocracy, puritanical posts from this same time, including an overt identification of religiosity with conservativism linked with a rejection that atheism could even be a part of conservativism. The Grand Inquisitor has always been on the staff of NRO.
National Review, Sept 21, 1984 by William F. Buckley, Jr.
THE PERMISSIVENESS of which modern liberals are so proud turns out, in situation after situation, to usher in circumstances liberals--and others--deplore; and so it is time now to check on your hierarchies and integrate our thinking.
During the past twenty years, erotic and pornographic books and magazines have become universal. It is as easy to buy Penthouse as the Wall Street Journal.
During the past twenty years, information about birth control has become quite generally available. Moreover, technological achievements, most notably The Pill, have made the control of pregnancies easier. Indeed, the word went out that The Pill in and of itself was the great emancipator of women.
During the past twenty years we have had an organized national war against poverty, to use the martial metaphor so often used. Whereas the military budget, twenty years ago, was twice the size of the welfare budget, now it is the other way around.
Now, what has happened, as a result of all these blessings?
At one level of permissiveness we have rampant homosexuality. This would appear to mean that whereas twenty years ago homosexuals were encouraged in continent behavior, no such self-discipline is any longer a part of the governing ethos. One result of this is a new and fatal disease, AIDS--which torments homosexuals primarily--plus other venereal diseases.
At the level of heterosexual experience, the result has been an extraordinary rise in illegitimate births. Surely, given the abundance, variety, and ubiquitousness of birth-control information, there should flow a sharp diminution in accidental pregnancies. But this didn't happen. In New York City, out-of-wedlock births are one-third of the total. In Harlem, 80 per cent. In Newark, 60 per cent. In Baltimore, 58 per cent.
Well, what about poverty?
In 1965, 17 per cent of Americans were "poor." By equivalent standards, today 15.2 per cent are poor. So the figures would appear to tell us that after the expenditure of perhaps a trillion dollars, the poverty level was reduced by only two percentage points. But then we note that in 1974--ten years ago--the poverty level had sunk to 11 per cent. And the figures are not entirely reliable, given that the poverty census-takers don't count non-monetary forms of income. If these were counted--such things as food stamps, and subsidized housing and medical care--poverty would be cut almost in half, to 8.8 per cent. Still, there are a lot of poor people, when you consider how much money we are spending toward the eradication of poverty.
Comes now the integration of these phenomena. Is there a correlation between illegitimate births and poverty? Answer: Yes, there is. If you are illegitimate, you probably will be reared in poverty.
What is it that brought about the twin conditions?
Dr. Sol Blumenthal, the New York City Health Department's director of biostatistics, informs the New York Times that the growth in illegitimacy is owing to a shift in society's attitudes toward the idea of having children out of marriage and to the lessened stigma attached to out-of-wedlock children, to quote a story by Joseph Berger. "People who were in that class were once held to ridicule and abuse," Dr. Blumenthal said. But now, "if there is no father around, there's nothing to berate anybody about," because in some neighborhoods a majority of the births are out of wedlock.
and the second reason? Dr. Blumenthal says that--to quote the story--"society has cushioned the blows of having children outside marriage by providing welfare payments and day-care programs."
So let us look the facts in the face, as Walter Mondale and Mrs. Ferraro are not doing, preferring instead to attribute high rates of poverty to Ronald Reagan, whom they may as well get mad at for not having any illegitimate children, proving that he does not have the common touch.
1. Sexual permissiveness has caused a rise in disease and death.
2. Sexual permissiveness has caused a rise in illegitimacy.
3. Illegitimacy has caused a rise in proverty.
4. The general availability of birth-control information has caused a rise in illegitimacy.
5. Liberal approaches to social life have really hit the jackpot: reduced morals, betrayed children, disease, and poverty. Nice going, gang. What's the next welfare trillion going to do for us?
It's not just the ideologically-driven cherrypicking of facts (or even "facts") that isn't new.
Later on I'll have some more pro-theocracy, puritanical posts from this same time, including an overt identification of religiosity with conservativism linked with a rejection that atheism could even be a part of conservativism. The Grand Inquisitor has always been on the staff of NRO.