Friday, July 13, 2012

What's Wrong With America?

In case you hadn't noticed, America is in shambles. Almost one out of every ten people you will meet will be out of a job, the economy and stocks are plummeting, the housing market is dire, our morals are so bad that we legally kill three thousand five hundred children a day, we have people who are married to others of their own sex, just turn on the news for Chicago, New York, or L.A. if you want to know about the crime rate, and a public so uneducated that they visit a wallstreet protest one day and blame Republicans for unemployment the next. Of course, I could go on about our various shortcomings, but they all are a result of a common thing: our culture.

So what's wrong with us? Why is the unemployment rate at eight point two percent? Why is their abortion, gay marraige, and crime? What is it about our culture that generates these things?

First of all, we have a culture based off of rights. "I have the right to..." is becoming a refrain for the American people. In a way, this is a good thing. I people never fought for their rights, the pilgrims never would have started America so that they could worship God freely without interuption. But the pilgrims understood something that the American people have missed horribly. That is the idea of rights with responsibility. Our culture has skipped over this priceless truth, and we have paid dearly.

It isn't hard to draw the paths between our shortcomings and the lack of responsibility. Abortion, for example, is a woman taking her rights to control her own body (and her baby's body) because she does not want to take the responsibility to raise a child. Also, she believes she has the right to have sex, but won't take the responsibility that comes with it, raising a child. With Walstreet prostests, people believe that they have the right to money, but will not take the responsibility of working hard.

Another result of the lack of this right and responsibility concept in America is the entitlement culture. This is very closely tied into the rights problem, but it deserves its own topic because it is the ultimate root to so many of our problems.

Mull on this: if you had the choice between someone giving you a dollar because you are a person, or working hard for the same dollar, which would you choose? Obviously, America has chosen to take the free dollar. Now, what if you were really hungry and there was a hotdog for one dollar. You are about to take the free dollar, but a Republican walks up to the character (aka the gov't) holding that free dollor and convinces him not to. You would get pretty mad, but you still have to eat. So, you slothfully do the work, get the dollar, and buy the hotdog. A jobs crisis, a poverty crisis, and a government debt crisis solved by one action by that mean old Republican.

Of course, we have a much larger scale that we are dealing with in America, but the principle is the same: if you give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. If you stop giving him a fish, he'll fish for himself every day.

The solution is obvious: take away entitlements and cut down on welfare programs. Restore the principle of Bradford: If a man (not a woman, working is the man's job, she has enough on her hands at home) does not work, he does not eat. Problem solved.

 This is not only a job stopper, entitlements lead to all sorts of laziness. This mentality leads to Occupy Walstreet, which leads to poverty, which leads to crime, etc. A downward cycle, that won't end until the source dies: entitlements.

Isaiah Taylor

"Aren't you a little young to being doing this?"
"Yes, yes I am"
-Phineas and Ferb


  1. Well said. However I feel like nitpicking just a little, even if it's not entirely related to the topic. First:

    "If you give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. If you stop giving him a fish, he'll fish for himself every day."
    I have to say that, unfortunately, completely STOPPING giving him fish doesn't guarantee he'll turn to fishing to feed himself. As this article ( describes, it's in a man's nature to be lazy; someone like this, then, would more likely steal or beg for their food (trust me, I've seen/heard it). Not only that, but we would be heartless, ungodly humans if we totally ignored this hypothetical man's plight.

    I would refer to the *original* proverb if I were you: "..TEACH a man to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime". Unfortunately, most public schools don't do this or do it inadequately these days; here I think is the rotting backbone of the problem you describe here, because bad habits begin early. Being a fellow homeschooler like you, yet also having taken classes in the public system, I can tell you the way the system is set up makes it difficult to motivate even good students to learn life skills--especially when the curricula focuses on irrelevant subjects and is littered with politically correct texts and biases, not to mention teachers have somehow gained free rein to subjectively grade a paper they don't agree with.

    I guess the point of that rant is, you cannot simply take away a vital part of someone's life (ex, food) and expect them to automatically KNOW how to get on their feet. While most adults SHOULD know by now how to get a job, etc, you'd be surprised how many high school or even college graduates--or drop outs--there are that have no idea how to survive in the "real world", and they're 30/40/almost 50 and living in their mother's basement. Don't ask me how I know. So it all comes down to EDUCATING people on how to better themselves; unfortunately, if they don't have the motivation, no amount of ANYTHING is going to help them. Which is why you have to get to children early and help them to understand why they should be motivated. [/part 1] [part 2]--v

    1. Anonymous,
      Thank you for your input. I agree with you completely. My quote play was supposed to imply that the man already knows how. But in real life, unless the man in question is autistic, he obviously knows how to work at a restaurant or a hotel or something. There are plenty of open jobs in America, but we are to lazy. However, if you are about to starve, you will obviously take that unpleasant job.

      There is another aspect to this which I failed to mention in my paper:the whole reason the government helps the poor is because the church isn't doing a good enough job. The government helping the poor usually ends up worse than when it started, but the church is biblically commanded to efficiently fill this role.

      Thanks for your objective view!

      Isaiah Taylor

  2. I think I've said enough about that. Now my other nitpick:

    "Restore the principle of Bradford: If a man (not a woman, working is the man's job, she has enough on her hands at home) does not work, he does not eat."
    First off, you're totally twisting the original quote with that parenthetical insert; even in Gov. Bradford's time, women worked, and worked in absolutely essential ways, though they're in ways siginficantly different from today. Secondly, as the daughter of a working woman and hopefully a future one myself, I take some offense to this. Yes it can be difficult to balance, but with God's help a woman is as equally capable if not more so than a man (also with God's help) at doing her fair share of work. If you doubt me, read Proverbs 31:10-31, and note how many times it is mentioned what work a woman can do with her hands--and DON'T take it literally! In today's day and age, spinning linen to sell or buying a field to plant with good things can be equally applied to an employee of a corporation or the owner of a small family business. It is entirely possible, then, for a woman to work as hard and in the same manner as a man while also raising a family--although it will take a strong relationship with her husband to make it work. (Besides, it's not JUST the mother's duty to raise the children; a strong paternal presence is as absolutely essential as the maternal). Look at me; I'm a product of just such a marriage, and I couldn't have been more blessed if I'd been born to any other parents.

    How this relates to your opinion piece: we should ALL be productive, WORKING members of society--not just men. You want a society where women are relegated to the household, look at a traditional/extremist Islamic family, and see where that's gotten them. Not to mention you limit the size of your workforce by at least 50%, or however the population is split.

    Just my two cents.
    -"Rosie the Riveter"

    1. Rosie,
      I'm sorry that you have taken offense, it was not intended to offend anyone.

      I suppose I should have explained myself better, so I will take that opportunity in my next article.
      I agree with you completely that women worked as hard as (if not harder than)men, but it was not even the same category of work that we see women taking part of in today's culture. Women's work in the time of the pilgrims was the vital role of housekeeping.

      Now, there were also godly women making things to sell like quilts, providing a second income, as with the Poverbs 31 passage. But you have missed a vital presupposition that is implied on this passage and throughtout the bible: the housework is primary, everything else is secondary. With the Proverbs 31 passage, there is displayed a sort of Superwoman. But she is awesome because she is able to keep her house in order AND be productive.

      In today's culture, many women work to escape the home. Others don't work to escape the home, they work to provide a second income, but have forgotten their primary duty, and therefore the home falls apart and therefore, the home falls apart.

      Now none of this is targeted at your family since I know nothing about you. If your mom was a superwoman and was able to keep a pristine home AND work a job, good for her! But you need to ask yourself, how clean is your bedroom right now? How organized are your closets and dressers? In comparison to that, how good is your education in preparing for a job?
      If you answer is bad on the first two but good on the last, maybe you need to reconsider your primary duty.

      Finally, I believe you are very confused on the honorability of being a woman. I believe that when a woman carries out her God given responsibility, she has not been relegated, but glorified. And I know that if my mom had been anymore of a " productive, WORKING member of society", her five kids and her house and her husband would have been the worse for it. No, I thank my mom for being stay-at-home and raising us with all she has. She has the most honorable job you can get.

  3. @Rosie the riveter-- Bravo! I always enjoy seeing both side of an argument and I believe you made your case well. Although I do acknowledge that there are problems in America and in our government, doing away with ALL of them completely at the same time seems slightly drastic, don't you think? Although I am not necessarily a fan of the women's rights movement, it has happened. Period. We cannot change it! Therefore, I do think its okay for a woman to have a small shop/business or to help with one. I believe there is a problem when the woman is working and the husband is not doing anything whatsoever to help support his family. We are all soldiers of Christ, we should be working and recruiting for his kingdom! And whether you do that teaching a co-op or working in a factory, be doing it for the right reasons!

    @Bosiah: I have indeed enjoyed your articles about government and politics from a teens perspective. However, where are your solutions? Where are your biblical advices/encouragements? It is easy to forget that WE make up the government too! Lets not just show the issues, but the answers! Yes, maybe the church isn't doing all it's supposed to, but what are you doing to change that?

    Kudos to you for taking a stand! I am eager to see what your blog evolves into as you continue your search for truth!

    1. Clara,

      Here are exerps from my articles to answer your Q:

      "The solution is obvious: take away entitlements and cut down on welfare programs. Restore the principle of Bradford: If a man (not a woman, working is the man's job, she has enough on her hands at home) does not work, he does not eat. Problem solved."

      "So where is the solution to this mess? Less government intervention. Repeal restrictions on businesses, which will let them get bigger, opening more jobs. It's common sense: kill the company, kill the jobs. And the way to kill a company is through government restrictions. Also, we need to get rid of alot of welfare programs for people without jobs. And while we're at it, take out all the entitlements programs. That's the church's job."

      "The solution? Flat tax for every citizen. That way, the government cannot tax certain groups of people just because. How would we feel if Congress just passed a bill with an extra tax on African American females. It would be constitutional, but I wonder how America would react."

      I could do more, but you get the point.

    2. Also, I don't like your "it has happened. Period. We cannot change it! Therefore, I do think its okay for a woman to have a small shop/business or to help with one."

      Our ultimate authority should be the bible, not cultural trends.


All comments are subject to moderation. I reserve the right to alter or remove any comment for any purpose including profanity.