In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy.
Mr Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers.
“The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said. “The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”
[…]Mr Osborne is under severe pressure to boost growth, amid signs the economy is slipping back into a recession.
The Institute of Fiscal Studies has urged him to consider emergency tax cuts in the Budget to reduce the risk of a prolonged economic slump.
But the Chancellor yesterday said he would stand firm on his effort to balance the books by refusing to borrow money. “Any tax cut would have to be paid for,” Mr Osborne told Sky News. “In other words there would have to be a tax rise somewhere else or a spending reduction.
“In other words what we are not going to do in this Budget is borrow more money to either increase spending or cut taxes.”
What I thought was funny was the poll in the article. It had three choices. “Tax the rich more”, “Borrow more” and “We can’t afford tax cuts”. There was no option to cut spending! But maybe there is nothing that can be cut?
Look at this article from the UK Daily Mail. (H/T Dina)
Excerpt:
The Tavistock Clinic is based in an anonymous concrete building in North London. Once there, you have to go to the third floor to find the Orwellian-sounding Gender Identity Development Unit.
The unit received £1,042,000 in funding last year from the local healthcare Trust. In layman’s terms, it treats patients who believe they are ‘trapped in the wrong body’.
Few would associate such a place with children barely old enough to attend school.
But it emerged this week that a little boy called Zach Avery, just five years old, now wears his hair permanently in bunches after being assessed by ‘experts’ at the Tavistock and ‘coming out’ as a girl.
And Zach is not an isolated case.
Over the past year, 165 children have been referred to the clinic’s team of social workers, child psychotherapists, psychologists and psychiatrists.
Seven children under the age of five were officially diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder (GID) — when a person is born one gender, but feels they are the other.
The UK government wants economic growth, but they are not willing to do what works – cut spending and cut taxes. They just can’t give up their social programs. It’s not even an option for them to consider.
Professor Mike S. Adams is pro-life, but he posted something on Facebook that I must disagree with.
He posted this:
Over 80% of post-abortive women said they would have had the baby if the guy had been supportive. Five guys find out their girl is pregnant: The first two pressure abortion, the third walks away or was never present, the fourth sticks around for 80 to 120 days, and the fifth steps up totally. This not a woman’s problem. It is a lack-of-manhood problem.
Mike has about 5000 friends, and 44 of them liked it. I would think that most of these people would call themselves pro-life conservatives. But I don’t think what he posted promotes the pro-life cause.
I replied to him with this:
Mike I could not disagree more. It’s a woman’s problem unless it is rape, since the woman consents to sex with a man she is not married to. In fact, the cause of abortion is YOUR opinion – namely, the opinion that women should not be obligated to be chaste or to think rationally about who they are having sex with. There is a path to marriage that goes through courtship, and that path has a name: self-control. Stop enabling the poor choices of women, because we have to stop the murder of unborn children.
Many of Mike’s friends supported him. So I wrote this:
Wow. I had no idea that so many of Mike’s friends think that the Bible is a pack of lies when it says that fornication is morally wrong. I guess you guys aren’t Christians then, since you feel so free and easy about revising the Bible when you feel like it.
If fornication is wrong, it’s wrong for women AND men. And you don’t fornicate and then expect happy outcomes from it. There is a word for a person who sins and then expects a good outcome. A FOOL.
Then Mike replied to me:
Sorry Wintery. Where I come from the man leads and is, therefore, responsible.
I replied to that with this:
Mike, I agree with male leading – IF the man is a Christian. But the men that these women chose are not Christians. And you can’t expect men to act morally unless they have a theistic framework that grounds morality.
Women should not be told, by you and others, that they can choose to have sex with immoral men and then expect the immoral men to act morally. That is just enabling abortion by justifying a lack of prudence and wisdom. Instead, we should be holding women accountable to choose men who WILL control themselves.
We should not be supporting the fantasy view of love that says that recreational sex magically leads men to commit to protect, provide and lead women for life. That view is neither wise nor Biblical. On the contrary, recreational sex leads men to NOT commit. Women have to learn how to select men, to evaluate them for marriage, and to make them prove themselves. We need to tell men AND women that sex before marriage is morally wrong. And we need to be convincing by showing them how recreational sex does not lead to stable marriages, and puts children, unborn and born, in harm’s way. Telling the truth about the danger of premarital sex is the best way to stop the killing of unborn children.
Here’s an example to make the point. We do not blame bears for mauling campers. Bears are bears, and they were bears before the campers showed up in their cave. We ought to blame the camper for choosing to wander off the trail and into the bear’s den in order to PET THE BEAR. Wild bears may eat free food that is offered to them, but they are not going to let you pet them and hug them. Women, like campers, need to be responsible. They need to choose the right man for marriage. They need to exercise self control. They need to make the man prove his ability to commit and support a family BEFORE they have sex with him. No one hires an employee without understanding what job they need done and then making sure that the candidate they choose can do the job. And that’s what we need to tell women.
Obviously, I was a little upset when I wrote that, but I hope it wasn’t too bad.
So what’s the point I was trying to make by being critical of Mike? I think the problem we have today is that men who are pro-life are unwilling to hold women accountable for their own poor decisions about sex and marriage. Basically, conservative and/or Christian men think that women don’t need to think through what choices are most likely to avoid abortion and most likely to achieve marriage. These men give tacit approval to the popular trend of trying to achieve marriage through premarital sex (or cohabitation), when the research shows that these behaviors do not result in long-lasting stable marriages. In fact, sex out of wedlock is a good way to get into a situation where an abortion will occur.
In my view, Mike is ainadvertently encouraging women to get into the situations where they will be pressured to abort by reinforcing the idea that there is nothing wrong with their plan to achieve marriage by having premarital sex (or cohabitating), and then expecting men to respond to their pregnancy by MARRYING them. Mike seems to be telling women that it is normal for them to expect that marriage will follow from premarital sex with men who have not been vetted for the roles of provider, protector and leader As if marriage is natural for men who don’t even have jobs and who are surrounded by women willing to have sex with them on the first date. Any man who will have recreational premarital sex with a woman is exactly the kind of person who will not commit to lifelong providing and fidelity – he is having sex before marriage because he wants recreation, without the commitment and self-sacrifice that marriage requires. Rationally speaking, it makes no sense for men to buy the cow, and to keep buying the cow with 40 years of labor, when they can get the milk for free. And that’s what we need to tell women – think with your minds, not with your emotions.
[A] recent study reveals that 88 percent of unmarried young adults (ages 18-29) are having sex. The same study, conducted by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, reveals the number doesnʼt drop much among Christians. Of those surveyed who self-identify as “evangelical,” 80 percent say they have had sex.
[…]In addition to having premarital sex, an alarming number of unmarried Christians are getting pregnant. Among unmarried evangelical women between the ages of 18 and 29, 30 percent have experienced a pregnancy (a number thatʼs actually 1 percent higher than among those who donʼt claim to be evangelical).
According to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly half of all pregnancies in America are unintended. And of those, 40 percent end in abortion. More than 1 million abortions occur in the United States each year. But perhaps the most disturbing statistic for the Church: 65 percent of the women obtaining abortions identify themselves as either Protestant or Catholic (37 percent Protestant and 28 percent Catholic). Thatʼs 650,000 abortions obtained by Christians every year.
Christian women are not told that premarital sex is wrong by many Christians and conservatives – and out of that refusal by “Christians” and “conservatives” to take a stand, we get 650,000 abortions per year. We need to have more courage to tell women to be more self-controlled and responsible when they choose who to have sex with, and when to have sex. We need to tell women to make good decisions that lead to stable marriages. We need to tell women to study these issues and to support policies that produce strong, moral men who are willing to marry – for example, by reforming education so that our schools produce men who can find jobs, perhaps by having more male teachers in the classroom. We need to tell women to support policies that make marriage more friendly for men, like abolishing no-fault divorce, and promoting shared parenting. Christians in particular need to counteract the views of love and romance that are prevalent in popular culture with a view of relationships built around chastity and love. Although many people today are uncomfortable with moral absolutes and moral judgments, it would be a good be a good idea for women to promote these things, so that the men they are choosing from are more moral.
In the end, I agree with Mike S. Adams in one respect. Abortion may be caused by a lack of manhood problem. Only the lack of manhood doesn’t come from the men that women choose to have premarital sex with. The lack of manhood comes from men who refuse to hold women accountable for their own free foolish decisions that put unborn children in harm’s way. In addition to the abortion problem that results from those foolish decisions, there is also the explosion in out-of-wedlock births to weigh in the balance. Again, the more people tell women that they should expect men who engage in recreational sex to commit to marriage after premarital sex (or cohabitation), the more fatherlessness we get.
[A] recent study reveals that 88 percent of unmarried young adults (ages 18-29) are having sex. The same study, conducted by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, reveals the number doesnʼt drop much among Christians. Of those surveyed who self-identify as “evangelical,” 80 percent say they have had sex.
[…]Of those 80 percent of Christians in the 18-29 age range who have had sex before marriage, 64 percent have done so within the last year and 42 percent are in a current sexual relationship.
In addition to having premarital sex, an alarming number of unmarried Christians are getting pregnant. Among unmarried evangelical women between the ages of 18 and 29, 30 percent have experienced a pregnancy (a number thatʼs actually 1 percent higher than among those who donʼt claim to be evangelical).
According to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly half of all pregnancies in America are unintended. And of those, 40 percent end in abortion. More than 1 million abortions occur in the United States each year. But perhaps the most disturbing statistic for the Church: 65 percent of the women obtaining abortions identify themselves as either Protestant or Catholic (37 percent Protestant and 28 percent Catholic). Thatʼs 650,000 abortions obtained by Christians every year.
The pregnancy stats are shocking to many—and the abortion stats horrifying— but the root problem is the willingness to have sex before marriage. Without sex, pregnancies and abortions donʼt happen.
If abstinence messages were actually working—and this generation of Christians was genuinely committed to saving sex for marriage—then the other issues would dwindle considerably.
If this generation wants to reverse the trend and reduce the number of Christians having premarital sex, the first step is trying to figure out why so few are waiting.
What do I have to say to this? Well, I am in my mid-thirties. I am chaste. In fact, I have not even kissed a woman on the lips, since I am saving that for when I get engaged. So I know how to be chaste and I know why I am doing it. I don’t see the value of sexual activity in a relationship. I don’t see how it helps me to achieve any deeper intimacy with a woman or to increase the probability of having a stable marriage that influences others and produces effective Christian children, which are my goals for marriage. I think the reason why people resort to sex in relationships is because they don’t have the same goals as I do for their relationships. They want recreation, and they think that marriage is a continuation of the fun they are having as singles. But I have a different goal for my relationships, and sex doesn’t fit into it my courting procedure.
What I do instead of sex is that I try to make Christian women read about apologetics, science, marriage, economics, parenting, foreign policy, politics, and so on. I try to undo the influence of non-Christian ideologies like feminism, socialism postmodernism, moral relativism, pacifism, etc. I try to get them to practice disagreeing and arguing with non-Christians so that they are more bold and persuasive in their witnessing. And finally, I try to provide them with a model of what a man should be, so that they find it easier to choose good ones and reject bad ones. All of this worldview development and debating tends to make them feel closer to God, because now they are able to serve him by understanding him and defending him in public. Premarital sex would not help any of my goals for women. I am not trying to have fun with them – I am trying to make them grow and be more effective.
The reason why most Christians don’t follow a plan like mine, and instead prefer sex is because they think that marriage is not a lifelong commitment with the purpose of serving God, but a recreational arrangement in which they will get their needs met without having to do anything. They go to church, they listen to sermons, they sing songs, and they have feelings about all of their churchy stuff. But they don’t really know what marriage is about or how to prepare for it or how to choose someone who will be a good mate. Rather than do the work, they try to short-circuit the process with sex, and then hope for the best. They trust their emotions and intuitions. They don’t want to take away the spontaneity of romance by sitting down and evaluating people to see if they really are Christians and whether they think of marriage as being about commitment and self-sacrifice as a way of serving God.
I do blame pastors for not educating women about how to prepare for marriage. I think the problem is that Christians pastors are too focused on reading the Bible, and not focused on integrating the Bible with external truth from history, science, etc. They stand at the front of the church giving speeches, but they never explain why what they are saying is true. Pastors are notoriously bad at apologetics – they tend to just drone on and on about things that they are not able to support evidentially. And the people listening just don’t bother to do it, since they are not persuaded that anything the pastor says is true. So, even if the pastors tell their flocks to get married and stay married, they don’t really convince why they ought to care what the Bible says, or how to achieve the goals set in the Bible through practical preparation and wise decisions.
I think that the right place to start with people on chastity is by showing them the costs for children who grow up in broken homes. Just studying that brings up the question: what should adults do in order to make sure that they don’t hurt children by being reckless and irresponsible? The answer is: adults should be chaste before marriage and then get married and be faithful and fulfill the roles or father/husband and mother/wife. And, adults should understand what laws and policies encourage or discourage people to get married and stay married, and vote for pro-marriage (anti-feminist) policies. All of the studying laws, policies, economics, etc. flows from that desire to do no harm to children. Even better than doing no harm would be to have a plan to have a marriage that will be a model to non-Christians while producing influential Christian children at the same time.
Who is supposed to explain why people should get married and how to prepare for marriage and how to select someone to marry and how to proceed with a courtship? Well, pastors are the ones who should know about these things. But they are often afraid to put moral boundaries on people who want to be guided by their emotions and the moral standards of their same-age peers and popular culture. And it’s not just a refusal to set moral boundaries and to prove them out using evidence – pastors also shy away from telling their flocks about how different laws and policies provide incentives and disincentives to people to either get married or not, or to stay married or not. How can people vote intelligently for a set of laws and policies that are marriage friendly when they never even think about such things? Pastors don’t want to annoy their flock, and they think that reading and thinking annoys their flock.
I think that we need to ask pastors to do a better job of integrating their Bible teaching with real evidence and arguments, and to integrate Christian values with laws and public policies that support those values, and to have real, practical advice on how to prepare for and execute courtship and marriage.
WINTERY KNIGHT 