It's Time for the Epstein Story to Be Buried
A New Poll Shows Old Media Resistance, and Nicolle Wallace Decides Which Country...
Is Free Speech Really the Highest Value?
Dan Patrick Was Right — Carrie Prejean Boller Had to Go
The Antisemitism Broken Record
Before Protesting ICE, Learn How Government Works
Republican Congress Looks Like a Democrat Majority on TV News
Immigration Is Shaking Up Political Parties in Britain, Europe and the US
Representing the United States on the World Stage Is a Privilege, Not a...
Older Generations Teach the Lost Art of Romance
Solving the Just About Unsolvable Russo-Ukrainian War
20 Alleged 'Free Money' Gang Members Indicted in Houston on RICO, Murder, and...
'Green New Scam' Over: Trump Eliminates 2009 EPA Rule That Fueled Unpopular EV...
Tim Walz Wants Taxpayers to Give $10M in Forgivable Loans to Riot-Torn Businesses
The SAVE Act Fight Ends When It Lands on Trump's Desk for Signature
Tipsheet

Oh Joy: The New York Times Changes the Definition of a Nuclear Family

Oh Joy: The New York Times Changes the Definition of a Nuclear Family

America’s Thanksgiving tables yesterday may have looked a bit different than, say, the 1950s. The changing family dynamics is a fact the New York Times is applauding in a new piece glorifying the increasing diversity of American households, be it blended families, same-sex partnerships or cohabitation.

Advertisement

From “The Changing American Family”:

The typical American family, if it ever lived anywhere but on Norman Rockwell’s Thanksgiving canvas, has become as multilayered and full of surprises as a holiday turducken — the all-American seasonal portmanteau of deboned turkey, duck and chicken.

While diversity is something to encourage, I believe in the home there is still no greater institution than the traditional family. It provides stability and comfort – especially for children growing up in uncertain climates.

Granted, the Times piece did begin to suggest family was still a cherished institution. But, that suggestion was quickly clarified.

“It’s the backbone of how we live,” said David Anderson, 52, an insurance claims adjuster from Chicago. “It means everything,” said Linda McAdam, 28, who is in human resources on Long Island.

Yes, everything, and sometimes too many things. “It’s almost like a weight,” said Rob Fee, 26, a financial analyst in San Francisco, “a heavy weight.” Or as the comedian George Burns said, “Happiness is having a large, loving, caring, close-knit family in another city.”

A large part of this “weight” or burden, according to the Times, is the cost of raising a child.

The nation’s birthrate today is half what it was in 1960.

One big reason is the soaring cost of ushering offspring to functional independence. According to the Department of Agriculture, the average middle-class couple will spend $241,080 to raise a child to age 18. Factor in four years of college and maybe graduate school, or a parentally subsidized internship with the local theater company, and say hello to your million-dollar bundle of oh joy.

Advertisement

To wrap up, the Times has encouraged the breakdown of the traditional family and put a price on children.

What, pray tell, is wrong with the white picket fence? America is founded on tradition and our strong families are a major part of our country’s success. Family is something to strive for, not avoid.

The moral implications notwithstanding, broken or nontraditional families can also have a negative impact on the country’s economic growth. Children without fathers, for instance, are much more likely to grow up in poverty, abuse drugs and alcohol or go to prison.

But, the New York Times is only concerned with diversity and making the Thanksgiving table as “multilayered” as possible.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement