Ruth Institute Blog

Have you ever seen a dog race up to the boundary of a yard, and abruptly stop?  It looks very odd, until you realize that the dog is wearing a fancy collar.  You surmise that there is an invisible electric “fence” embedded in the yard. The dog has been shocked so often that it stops itself before it actually touches the invisible fence line.

This image flashed in my mind as I was reading “Home Economics: The Consequences of Changing Family Structure,” by Nick Schulz. Mr. Schulz does a fine job laying out the harmful effects of the deconstruction of the family, both to individuals and to the larger project of the free society. This nice little book lays out the economic consequences of family breakdown.  But he studiously avoids anything that might have even the remotest chance of getting him tagged with the label of “moralizing.”  Or perhaps I should say, anything that would “zap” him with such a label.  

He throw out the obligatory protective covering right at the beginning of this small paperback by promising to refrain from “passing judgment about divorce or out-of-wedlock births.”  I think this is rather an odd position to take while describing such  socially destructive trends.   But that is where we are as a culture, due to the systematic strategy of the Life Style Left of zapping anyone who dares to challenge their Orthodoxy. You know the Orthodoxy, don’t you?

• The kids will be fine as long as their parents are happy.  Read more…

By JAMES P. EHRHARD

‘Gender identity’ trumps any squeamishness girls might feel about sharing bathrooms with boys.

On July 1, 2012, a law went into effect in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts titled “An Act Relative to Gender Identity.” The law added the term “gender identity” to the state’s antidiscrimination statute, joining far better known terms like “race,” “religion,” “sex” and “national origin.” The statute now also applies to “gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance, or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.” The common term these days is “transgender.” Read more…

Parents across Massachusetts are upset over new rules that would not only allow transgender students to use their restrooms of their choice – but would also punish students who refuse to affirm or support their transgender classmates.

Last week the Massachusetts Department of Education issued directives for handling transgender students – including allowing them to use the bathrooms of their choice or to play on sports teams that correspond to the gender with which they identify. Read more…

In case you missed my prior posts about the components of marriage located here and here, here are the components of marriage again:

1. The duration component. (for life)

2. The number component. (two people)

3. The blood relationship component. (not closely related by blood)

4. The age component. (not too young)

5. The human component (human beings rather than animals or other non humans)

6. The gender/procreative component. (both genders required)

Six states and Washington D.C. have smashed the gender component, and there are marriage ballot measures going on in four states in November to see if they will retain this component or not. Clearly the gender/procreative component is taking a beating. But it’s not going down without a fight.

If this component gets destroyed, other components may be up for grabs pretty quickly – after all, if marriage is only about love or equal rights, those who want to alter or remove the remaining marriage components can use the same reasoning to get what they want. The duration component was smashed via no fault divorce starting in the late 1960s. So of the four that remain, which component will be next on the chopping block? Here they are: Read more…