Are there single fathers, who never married, with children in the West?

[columbus]

Post #98 refers. Could we have figures of such rare fathers and most mothers?

Regards

You are probably better able to Google the statistics than I am. Compared to most people on RF I am seriously "internet challenged".
I will predict that the number is tiny, based on my personal experience. Nothing like 3,000,000 households in the USA.

Tom

 

[paarsurrey]

Yeah. They started off as a couple, but never got married.

Figures please?
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Maybe that's what OP meant, it's often hard to tell
But I suspect that he is comparing the number of single mothers who were never in a real relationship with the father, to the opposite.
It gets hard to tell what married means nowadays. I have a 30ish relative who just got his 5th divorce. He is too religious to live in sin, but you can get married and divorced for about $200 total expense. My sister never married her partner Frank, but they've been rock solid together for 30 years now.
Tom

You are real smart.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I wouldn't call it religious. But yes, they are divine laws and we all ultimately answer for them. Though you are free to believe whatever you want.

I endorse you.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Figures please?
Regards

Figures? Of the guys I work with? There are 3 of them. I already provided the statistics of single fathers in the US.

 

[columbus]

I wouldn't call it religious. But yes, they are divine laws and we all ultimately answer for them. Though you are free to believe whatever you want.

But what are these laws, exactly?
You described lying to the Church about adultery in order to get an annulment. Would it be morally better if one of the parties did actually screw someone, even if they didn't want to, rather than lie? You can't tell me what reasons for killing constitute murder.
The problem with Abrahamic morality is the vague, legalistic, and subjective nature of the code. It is obviously too primitive to be of much use to us today.
Tom

 

[Draka]

Thanks for your curiosity, first let us have figures.
Regards

Um, how about no? You asked a question in your OP. It has been answered several times. You are just as capable of using a search engine as the rest of us here so why should we provide statistics for you? Are you still questioning that single fathers exist? I believe the question now is "what is your point"? They exist. Now, what is the purpose of asking the question in the first place?

 

[leibowde84]

- as we see single mothers who never married with children in the West.
Regards

Just out of curiosity, now that the statistics have been provided, what are you trying to get at with this thread? Do you doubt that unmarried single fathers exist in the west?

 

[leibowde84]

I wouldn't call it religious. But yes, they are divine laws and we all ultimately answer for them. Though you are free to believe whatever you want.

You BELIEVE and have FAITH that these laws exist. But, no one KNOWS either way. Thus, it seems to be disrespectful to pass judgment on others according to these claimed laws. Don't you think?

 

[viole]

I rely on the Spirit, but it is within the scriptures also, Gnostic included.
To your question, all killing is wrong. But I wonder why you did not concern yourself with the killing of men

If you rely on the spirit, why do you mention Scriptures in your arguments? Whenever you do that, you expose yourself to the obvious fact that in Scriptures He commanded something wrong, if all killings are wrong. And if that someone does wrong things, how can anything he says concerning right and wrong be taken seriously ?

In other words, when you say that we will have to pay the consequences of disobeying him, what commandements of him are you referring to?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Robert.Evans]

Maybe I am misremembering. But I seem to recall you advocating for capital punishment even when the perp was safely in prison.
Capital punishment is killing.
Tom

err.... don't recall saying that no. Not lest you misunderstood or I mis-wrote.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Then, necessarily, God ordered immoral actions from people? Can you explain your reasoning?

How did you come by that reasoning from my post?? However, all things are God...evolving consciosness. I seem to recall discussing these kinds of things with you before to one degree or another.

Also, the "why didn't you mention men" thing was pretty absurd. "Women and children" are a group that, throughout history, have been thought of as "innocent". The men, most likely, or at least most of the able bodied ones, were probably combatants.

That is a rather racially motivated comment, if you don't mind me saying.

 

[Robert.Evans]

But what are these laws, exactly?
You described lying to the Church about adultery in order to get an annulment. Would it be morally better if one of the parties did actually screw someone, even if they didn't want to, rather than lie? You can't tell me what reasons for killing constitute murder.
The problem with Abrahamic morality is the vague, legalistic, and subjective nature of the code. It is obviously too primitive to be of much use to us today.
Tom

To use the modern terminology, not having an affair behind someone's back or committing murder is pretty easy to understand for anyone.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Just out of curiosity, now that the statistics have been provided, what are you trying to get at with this thread? Do you doubt that unmarried single fathers exist in the west?

May we deduce, considering Tom's remark, that women sometimes end up with children without a serious relationship, but men don't. Though I think it would be harder for a man to accomplish the same as they don't have the baby growing inside them in the first place. So they seem to have a disadvantage/advantage.

 

[Robert.Evans]

You BELIEVE and have FAITH that these laws exist. But, no one KNOWS either way. Thus, it seems to be disrespectful to pass judgment on others according to these claimed laws. Don't you think?

No. They exist because He exists, and we know that through his son and the Spirit he gave.

 

[leibowde84]

How did you come by that reasoning from my post?? However, all things are God...evolving consciosness. I seem to recall discussing these kinds of things with you before to one degree or another.

That is a rather racially motivated comment, if you don't mind me saying.

You said that "all killing is wrong". God ordered people in the Old Testament to kill others. Thus, God ordered people to be immoral or commit "wrong" acts ... according to your logic.

I didn't mention any race in my comment, so can you explain how it was "racially motivated"? Not to mention, I was talking about the Biblical passage noted in the previous comment. The words "women and children" are actually used in scripture (or at least their equivalent).

 

[leibowde84]

No. They exist because He exists, and we know that through his son and the Spirit he gave.

You BELIEVE that you know this through his son. I also BELIEVE that I have a relationship with God. But, we could both very well be wrong.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you rely on the spirit, why do you mention Scriptures in your arguments?

Because it is the one place we can all go to check things. It is the one physical relationship that we have with God. How can you hear lest the preacher proclaim, as it is written. We are still human. Understanding comes from learning and then guidance.
We still live on planet earth you know.

Whenever you do that, you expose yourself to the obvious fact that in Scriptures He commanded something wrong, if all killings are wrong. And if that someone does wrong things, how can anything he says concerning right and wrong be taken seriously ?

In other words, when you say that we will have to pay the consequences of disobeying him, what commandements of him are you referring to?

Ciao

- viole

I am not sure what is being said here. If you are asking me to explain God so that you understand how he gives out judgement, then fine. Is that it though?

 

[leibowde84]

May we deduce, considering Tom's remark, that women sometimes end up with children without a serious relationship, but men don't. Though I think it would be harder for a man to accomplish the same as they don't have the baby growing inside them in the first place. So they seem to have a disadvantage/advantage.

Where did this "serious relationship" classification come from. The OP specifically asks about men who haven't been married. I didn't speak to "serious relationships" at all. That would be a different discussion.

And, no, I don't think that is a reasonable deduction. I know several men raising their kids on their own who have never been married.

 

[Robert.Evans]

You said that "all killing is wrong". God ordered people in the Old Testament to kill others. Thus, God ordered people to be immoral or commit "wrong" acts ... according to your logic.

All things in the aeon are the God of this aeon.

I didn't mention any race in my comment, so can you explain how it was "racially motivated"? Not to mention, I was talking about the Biblical passage noted in the previous comment. The words "women and children" are actually used in scripture (or at least their equivalent).

All groups of things alike are race