When I read the phrase, ‘Out of Wedlock’, I begin to think: Does ‘In Wedlock’ mean that the scenario is different? Technically, I guess there is a difference considering one’s marital status is affected…but realistically, what does In/Out Wedlock imply when kids are involved?
When I think of both (married/unmarried), based on my baby daddy experience and my knowledge of the in’s and out’s of countless failed marriages, I really do not comprehend a difference. If momma and daddy are together, but hate each other there is no difference. If momma and daddy are ‘living in sin’ and estranged there is no difference. With the overwhelming divorce rate (over 50%) and pathetic marriages that should have ended years ago (too many to count) I ask, what is the point of ‘locking’ the involvement up in holy matrimony if a pregnancy sneaks up on ya? What does the marriage guarantee when thinking of the children?
Should more black folk get married considering the following statistic:
70% of BLACK children are raised by single black women
Which is better?
*Go ahead and get hitched knowing you are not ready to be married to the man/woman you made the
*Accept the baby momma/baby daddy role and be the best parent you can be outside of the home.
40% babies out-of-wedlock
“For a variety of reasons, it's become more acceptable for women to have babies without a husband”, said Duke University's S. Philip Morgan…”
Nearly half British babies out of wedlock - UPI.com
“The percentage of British babies are now born out of wedlock continues to approach 1-in-2…”
If the Out of Wedlock scenario is becoming “acceptable”, why does it still have a negative connotation when speaking of black people, particularly poor black people? I press here because this wealthy couple has not received much flack for their out of wedlock baby making ways:
But, this brother has (perhaps he should even with his has-been status – Wow!):
Shared by Brian E. Payne.