The prioritization of children is something in which both you and I believe very, very strongly! And I think we want the same things for all children. I don't believe we as a nation have written off children as badly as you think, but I think the problems are overwhelming because of our size and cultural complexity.
We already have many programs designed for early intervention that provide one-on-one hands-on help for parents who are identified as high risk. These begin in infancy. (My best friend in law school was an Early Intervention specialist) We have Head Start, we have subsidized breakfast and lunch in the schools, we have Food Stamps, ADFC, Medicaid, subsidized housing. The programs aren't working because they support the physical, but can't heal the moral and spiritual deficiencies(and I don't mean that in the religious sense, I think you know that).
When, in order to save an entire generation, do we just take children out of their environment completely (a la Newt) to break the cycle? How far do we let things deteriorate? I don't believe we are studiously ignoring anything. I think that we're baffled what to do next taht won't infringe on the rights our country is founded upon. More taxes? More programs? Prove to me that what you already take is doing something positive! Explain to me why the intervention isn't accomplishing anything now! WHat vast wealth are you planning to use? We already have much more than a "tinge" of socialism! The government takes a whopping 36% of our family's single income salary to provide these programs. How much more should they be allowed to take?
If you take more, then you force more mothers back to work and you further weaken an already scrambling middle-class.
For the record, I am strongly opposed to assault weapons -period and I have a lot of conflict in my mind about gun control. |
