"Crisis: The Black Family is Failing"

Admittedly William Raspberry, a black columnist for the Washington Post, brings cheers from me when I read his columns. He has the guts and status and skin color to say what I cannot. But I share his concern for the black community especially after the articles in the Sunday Journal Sentinel Crossroads section. In those articles, teens sound off on violence in their communities begging for solutions. They don't want to be ignored; to be left to choose participation or victimization. If the article had been about sex, the response would have been similar, especially among the girls. They're just kids who want to be happy kids. Adults should be able to provide that simple request.

Adults must stand up and boldly bring standards of conduct and morality back into children's lives. We can no longer cower in fear of being labeled as forcing "agendas" or religion on Americans. If our agenda is to better the lives of our children now and in their future, we have every reason we need to proceed. We also have every reason to vehemently reject what is contributing to the problem.

Adults of all races allowed a cultural shift because we didn't think it would affect us personally. We bought into the supremacy of individual rights without considering cultural and societal consequences. We would just choose what was good and reject what was bad. Those that chose otherwise would only be hurting themselves. But then our own children began making bad choices because of the influences that seemed less demanding or more fun or personally freeing or rebellious. We wonder how that happened.

As Mr. Raspberry points out what is happening is the "sociological equivalent of global warming: easier to document than reverse, inconsistent in the near-term effect and disasterous in the long run." Problems in the black community are everyone's problems. They are the mirror for every other community. Reflected is what happens when men are not involved in children's lives, when marriage declines, when higher education is not sought, when religions abandon sanctions against premarital sex, when adults do not provide for their children, when unemployment is an excuse. African-Americans might lead other ethnic groups but we are following down the same path.

This isn't a problem; its a condition. The solution requires radical change. That type of change might require individuals to give up some freedoms so that a community can heal. Just as Daniel Patrick Moynihan was pilloried for his warnings 40 years ago perhaps the radical reforms suggested and rejected in Milwaukee and elsewhere should receive a second look. Our governor touts "Kids First"--lets give that some teeth!

USA Today:"Cohabitation is replacing Dating"

Cohabitation has increased ten-fold since 1960. Eight percent of US coupled households are unmarried cohabitators; about 10 million people. Most are between the ages of 25 to 34. Cohabitation arrangements generally last two years. For those that cohabitate for 5 years, only about 50% get married.

Reasons to cohabitate are economic and social and the couples might not share the same reasons. New research shows women view cohabitation as a step before marriage whereas men see it as the step before any degree of commitment. Women are romantic; men are practical. Women improve the men's lifestyle. Another study indicates that men who live with their wives before marriage aren't as committed to the marriage as those who do not cohabitate first.

The new twist on all this is that couples now view marriage as sacred, an ideal, a forever thing--like this is a new concept. But getting married now requires practice before the ceremony. Potential candidates are tried out and pass or fail "the test". What test? What is there in the existence of twenty year olds that can predict whether or not they make the perfect person, spouse or parent in a couple of years or over a lifetime? Marriage is not a moment caught in time although the wedding might be. Marriage is an evolution of two people involved in a journey of love. The bad times are not pass/fail because love sustains both people. The couple become new people because of their love. They aren't suppose to be the same people as the day before their wedding. What makes a person a good spouse doesn't need to be tested by cohabitation because it is most apparent in his/her character, beliefs and other relationships.

Those that cite the rise of cohabitation as a link to lower divorce rates are forgetting that cohabitators split up at a higher rate than marrieds. Those that consider it their right to cohabitate should at least realize that might be all there is. If they want more, they might wait too long in the "test the waters" stage.

"In Kenya, All-female village becomes an Outpost of Feminism"

Why mention this story that appeared on July 17th? Because it is illustrative of how women can change their world as they desire. In Kenya, a woman started a female village and welcomes those that flee the injustices of their tribal traditions. A thirteen year old girl is welcomed so she does not have to marry the old man three times her age. Women who are raped and then abandoned by their "shamed" husbands are welcomed. Women who wish to refuse the traditional genital mutilation are welcomed. Women who want to avoid marriage proposals they cannot refuse are welcomed. Although they are still isolated, the cultural shift is already being felt with the grudging acknowledgment of the men. The fact is the men need the women and women can set the terms.

Women in this country bear the brunt of our sexual revolution. As with the Kenyan women, gaining economic autonomy was the first step in their liberation. But American women have been misled in pursuing "sexual freedom" because it comes at the expense of their essential womanhood, their children and their emotional needs. Women can change that. Empowerment is but a tool for a wise leader.

Milwaukee Magazine: "The Birth Control Wars"

There seems to be some confusion. A Catholic hospital with a medical mission evolving from its theological and social beliefs has the perfect right to provide services consistent with those beliefs, as does a Baptist hospital or a Mormon hospital or a Jewish hospital.

The Catholic Church has not changed its beliefs; however, the United States and the medical profession has changed theirs. Until forty years ago, there were no birth control wars. Catholic and non-Catholic hospitals, clinics and physicians had the same standards. Griswold v. Connecticut made birth control legal for married couples. Admittedly, the Catholic Church can be faulted for "looking the other way" as the Pill gained favor among the vast majority of American women, including Catholics. But the theological teaching never was diluted even when the American "teachers" remained silent.

Without the establishment of Catholic hospitals and clinics since the birth of this nation, healthcare would never have been available to generations of Americans reliant on Catholic charity, Catholic social justice and Catholics driven by their faith to enter medical professions. Non-Catholic doctors, nurses, staff and patients have always been welcomed at these facilities. Surely, few would refuse entering a Catholic hospital just because it was Catholic. Over time, Americans came to see these hospitals as just hospitals. Their Catholicity seemed to disappear with the nuns in habits in the general public's consciousness. But they are still Catholic institutions. To many Catholics, they are a refuge where they can receive the healthcare consistent with their religious beliefs.

Drs. Linn, Mickelson and Jones-Nosacek, who have NFP-only gynecology practices, are sought out by Catholics and non-Catholics alike who do not want to take birth control nor have their teen daughters put on the pill as a matter of course. But it is not just the lack of a prescription that make them doctors of choice for their patients. These doctors teach their patients how to value their reproductive system and use natural means to remain healthy women. There is a huge difference seeing a doctor who expects you to use birth control and one who respects you not to use it. That level of respect continues through menopause and beyond.

The birth control wars are not inflicted by the Catholic Church. Rather, the Church has been forced to protect its religious beliefs and rights from increasingly virulent attacks from all fronts. As Americans we all have a right to the health care we choose...at the places and from the people who can provide it at our ability to pay. To say that someone else has to meet your needs when they do not morally or professionally agree is a gross infringement on the provider's rights. We are all conditioned to go to providers to meet our needs whether that is Starbucks or McDonalds for coffee or Petite Sophisticates or Lane Bryant for clothes. It happens all the time to all of us--we go where we need to go for what we want. But those choices just aren't fodder for a feature story.

Bravos for One Reporter

I just read a reprint in the South Bend Tribune of an article by Ruth Padawer of The Record in Bergen County, NJ entitled "Herpes Epidemic Preys on Uninformed". It is literally the first article on an STD that I've read that was unbiased and didn't pit opposing opinions to fill the column space.

Ms. Padawer committed a "flagrant act of journalism" and reported facts and used testimonies to indicate the difficulty of living with herpes. Amazingly missing was her own opinion. The reader reads, comprehends and decides how to use the information.

Although some may fault her for not mentioning "condoms" or "safe sex", by not doing so, the focus was on just how one contracts the virus and how disease management is a lifelong process.
She also didn't support sexual abstinence in any way. Personally, I think that made that alternative crystal clear in the article. After all there is a herpes epidemic--one in four of us have it. When even the tiniest herpes lesion provides entry to an HIV invasion and when the body's immune system is already weakened fighting herpes, a wake up call should be annoying the heck out of us!

American Academy of Pediatrics --WHY?

Its time adults ask WHY? Why would doctors who treat the babies and children of this country formulate a teen pregnancy policy that isolates one consequence of sexual behavior from all others? Are they unaware of the other dangers of STD and HIV, reading only alerts to SIDS and fetal alcohol syndrome? Are their patients too young for them to care that a girl could lose her fertility to an STD before she can fully comprehend what that means? Afterall, she'll be somebody else's patient by then! Why would they look upon sex only in its isolated physical dimension? Are they only treating illness now and not patients? Don't they care that physically, mentally, and emotionally immature children can carry scars of their sexual behavior well into adulthood affecting themselves and their ability to form loving relationships? To insure that all teens have access to birth control, does that now mean parents will be kept out of appointments and consultations at the pediatricians' offices as they are at the gynecologists' just in case the subject of sex arises? Will this be another cadre of doctors placing themselves between parents and their children's health?

Why would doctors be advised by their professional association that counseling their young patients to be sexually abstinent is no longer their role? What makes that different than counseling them to eat right, exercise, get enough sleep, not to smoke or drink alcohol or do drugs? Why is sexual abstinence an "ideology" and not sound medicine? Does it harm you? Does it cause you to get pregnant? Will you get an STD as a teenager because you don't partake in sexual exploration? Does taking birth control pills or injecting chemicals or excess hormones into pubescent girls make sound medical practice? Does any of this make sense? Are we at the point where we can swallow without question the opinion that artificially altering our girls so they can play around is superior to teaching them to respect their womanhood and enpowering them to seek real love and respect from the boys they meet?

WHATS THE MATTER WITH US?

Hopefully, the decision to make this a page one story was to raise those questions and not to give abstinence supporters another ridiculous battle to wage and our kids one fewer chance to become the best adults they can be.

The Down Low and AIDS Awareness

The Wisconsin Abstinence Coalition commends the organizations in the African-American community of Milwaukee for raising awareness of HIV transmission through the phenomenon known as the Down Low.

Men on the down low describe themselves as straight and are in heterosexual relationships, often as husbands and fathers, but sneak sex with men on the side. Obviously, this exposes women and their babies to HIV/AIDS even though they assume they are in "safe" relationships.

By exposing the Down Low, and offering the new rapid HIV testing, women and children can discover their contagion early when treatment can be more beneficial. Rumors about jailhouse sex and inmate rape also must be confronted. However, first and foremost, men who have sex with men, whether they know they have HIV or not, need to accept the responsibility to tell women of their status prior to initiating a sexual encounter. When a killer is lose, in this case AIDS, all stops have to be pulled. In about half the United States, it is a crime to knowingly pass on HIV/AIDS to anyone. The knowing part is that you know you have it. Wisconsin does not have such a law.

An article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on June 25th, attributes only 720 of the 1755 African American AIDS cases in Wisconsin to homosexual sex. Even discounting the taboo of homosexuality in the African-American community that might have skewed that figure, a dangerous behavior is now affecting innocent people through no choice of their own. This is the point when the AIDS tradgedy becomes a public concern. It is one thing to make risky choices that have personal consequences; it is another to inflict those consequences on others to satisfy personal needs. A loving husband and father does not go on the down low nor does he have sex with prostitutes or other women. He doesn't bring the risks of his contemptible secret life into his own home.