Share

Right-Wing Pundit Phyllis Schlafly Decries Government Assistance for "Unmarried Moms"

by: Charlie Eisenhood  |  Think Progress | Report

Over the past two months, many Republican pundits and members of Congress have been calling for the end of unemployment benefit extensions for the millions of Americans who can’t find work. Meanwhile, GOP Senators held the unemployment insurance (UI) extension bill hostage for weeks as 2.5 million Americans were left without the “desperately needed lifeline” of UI benefits. Even as five workers fight for every one job opening, Republicans are still calling the unemployed “spoiled” and suggesting that blocking benefits is fine because it only affects a “small amount of people.”

Last week at a fundraiser for Michigan GOP congressional candidate Rocky Raczowski, conservative pundit Phyllis Schlafly added her voice to the chorus crying out against government assistance for the poor or unemployed:

One of the things Obama’s been doing is deliberately trying to increase the percentage of our population that is dependent on government for your living. For example, do you know what was the second biggest demographic group that voted for Obama? Obviously the blacks were the biggest demographic, y’all know what was the second biggest? Unmarried women. 70% of unmarried women voted for Obama. And this is because when you kick your husband out, you’ve got to have Big Brother Government to be your provider. And they know that. They’ve admitted it. And they have all kinds of bills to continue to subsidize illegitimacy…

The Obama administration wants to continue to subsidize this group because they know they are Democratic votes.

Schlafly’s argument is specious. She talks about “subsidizing illegitimacy,” but not all single women are mothers. Less than 20 percent are mothers to young children. The rest include millions of widows, millions of young never-married women, and plenty in between — some of whom have kids, but most of whom do not.

The fact that programs like UI and food stamps help unmarried women is only a byproduct of the system designed to help everyone in need – men and women alike. In fact, men are receiving more UI benefits than women – the unemployment rate for men is a full 2.2 points higher than it is for women.

That didn’t stop Schlafly from doubling down on her falsehoods in an interview with TPM yesterday. “All welfare goes to unmarried moms,” she claimed. “They are trying to line up their constituency for Obama and Democrats against Republican candidates.”

Of course, government assistance goes to both genders. But moreover, considering that 84 percent of custodial single parents are mothers and a quarter of American children are being raised by unmarried mothers, supporting single women is critical for supporting children. As the Center for American Progress’ Liz Weiss puts it, “When single mothers lose their home, suffer from hunger, or can’t find a job, their children also lose their home, go hungry, or suffer from greatly reduced household resources.”

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

Support Truthout's work with a $10/month tax-deductible donation today!
Share         

»


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

PSchafly is an old hag who

PSchafly is an old hag who has been fortunate to spend her life w/ a husband whom she has not HAD to kick out b/c he was cheating , drinking, abusing her or raping the children! She needs to count her blessings & realize not everyone has her life. As a woman, her chances of being widowed are higher w/ every year passing, so statistics favor her having the pleasure of being single some day. Also, the general demographics of women outnumbering men--accomplished by God: she has nothing to say. As a"pro-birther" she also has lost her right to say anything.

This is news? Why engage

This is news?
Why engage this ancient crackpot?

I am all for Phyllis

I am all for Phyllis Schafly, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, and the rest of them exercising their right to free speech and leaving no doubts as to who exactly they are What I am eternally disappointed by is the lack of response from the left pointing out the errors in their logic and their distortions by omission. The left's refusal to go on the attack and point out the flaws in their thinking. Democracy is a contact sport and the bottom line is you can't win if you won't even enter the game.

What proves that there is no

What proves that there is no (good) god in existence is the early deaths of such people as MLK and RFK yet this despicable pointless, hate-filled, hateful pile of lard, lives a long life stirring up stupidity to the end.

Mz Phyllis was vehemently

Mz Phyllis was vehemently opposed to the Equal Rights Amendment. One of her emotional arguments was that she didn't want her daughters going to war. Hell, I didn't want my sons going to war. My Marine reservist (who joined to earn college money that was not enough to actually pay for school) was activated to serve in Iraq anyway. I've seen no word on her current opinion of our female military in service in Iraq and Afghanistan. Have they suddenly become her heroes?

She has always launched her vile spew from the comfort of a well funded and appointed home. To say that she hasn't two clues to rub together about real life in the hinterlands is a gross understatement. I seriously doubt she could handle the life many of those she denigrates are forced to lead. She obviously has not acted on her beliefs that women should stay home, be quiet, and rear the children. So Phyllis, be the example of what you want other women to do: stay home and STFU.

Phyllis Schlafly claims to

Phyllis Schlafly claims to be a Christian. She is not.
This is what Brad Hicks, biblical scholar, said about it:
"And at the end of his most famous sermon, the Sermon on the Mount, this is what Jesus, the Judge of all the dead, said about the Four Spiritual Laws and similar false gospels, in Matthew 7:15-23:
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Now, those who want to defend the false gospel will accuse me of preaching a false gospel myself, one of "works, not faith." They point out that Jesus said that He was the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Jesus. Piffle. If you hear anyone who's a seminary graduate make this attack, then you know that they're not merely deceived, but actively lying to you. Why? This is first-year stuff, first semester stuff; easily and trivially disposed of by the Church Fathers almost two thousand years ago and taught to every halfway serious Bible student in his first month or two of classes. Yes, the scripture teaches that no amount of feeding the hungry and giving drink to the thirsty and clothing the naked and visiting prisoners will save you without Jesus' sacrifice. Yes, the Scripture teaches submission to Christ in faith. But it also clearly and unambiguously teaches that the only true way is neither pure faith nor pure works, but faith that works. If you think that your faith is in Jesus Christ but that faith allows you to callously neglect, feel contempt for, or actively despise the poor and unfortunate, then yours is not a gospel of Jesus Christ, but of the Devil himself. If you allow that urge to neglect to influence you, if you show that contempt, if you actively spite the poor and unfortunate because that false gospel taught you that it was OK to do so, then Jesus Himself says that you will burn for it."

Phyllis is saying, "Let them

Phyllis is saying, "Let them eat cake.", remember?

Poor Phyllis -- she must be

Poor Phyllis -- she must be rabid over the publicity lavished on Sarah these days, and is screaming for the limelight that no longer shines on her. It's too bad that SNL didn't arrange to do for Phyllis what Tina Fey did so terrifically for Sarah. But hey, Sarah at least won a beauty contest once What makes Phyllis think that she's in the same league just because she can spout the same political trash?

This bat is just shy of 86

This bat is just shy of 86 years old.
Her rotten ideas have long outlived he brain, unfortunately.

I agree that it is usually

I agree that it is usually better to ignore these statements and not give them any more play than they get. But what she is proposing is to penalize kids for something that is not their fault. That is who would suffer if she had her way on this - innocent children - a violation of equal protection.

Phyllis Schlafly is one of

Phyllis Schlafly is one of American society's great burdens.

Interesting that the great

Interesting that the great abortion opponent is so quick to call some children, once born, born "illegitimately."

How is any child illegitimate?

She is so sickening it makes me want to vomit. Everything about her is illegitimate!

This woman is so insane and

This woman is so insane and frightening in her extremism, has anyone ever considered that she is paid by the Democrats to get people out to vote for them?

Man she is old!! Bet she

Man she is old!! Bet she beat her daddy's "indentured livestock" as a kid cause she had to slop the trough.

Since the 13th amendment took private ownership from individuals and put corporations in charge of managing the 21st century version of "open range human livestock"... Here she is again... "Whining" cause she might have to feed a new generation of "open range indentured livestock" and can't beat em..

There is no end to mean

There is no end to mean spirited aggression of the plutocrats with their ''I got mine" attitude. How can any of us enjoy life when we are surrounded by the poverty of others. I am reminded of the scene in The Christmas Carol when the ghost opens his coat to reveal the children, ignorance and want. What kind of country do we want to live in these days? Where is the outrage of the left? Time to organize folks.

On Saturday 07/31/2010 at

On Saturday 07/31/2010 at 17:51 hmpmttysg wrote:

Mz Phyllis was vehemently opposed to the Equal Rights Amendment. One of her emotional arguments was that she didn't want her daughters going to war. Hell, I didn't want my sons going to war.

Actually, the real reason Schlafly campaigns so hard against the Equal Rights Amendment was homophobia. Long before anyone even thought of it, Schlafly warned that passage of the ERA, which would have imposed a constitutional ban on discrimination on the basis of gender, would lead to "homosexuals getting married."

Yes, she said it -- Way back in the 1970s, years before gay rights advocates were even considering marriage (Indeed, it was a time when marriage was, for most gay people, anathema to what it meant to be gay).

Contrary to popular belief, it was homophobia, not fear of women serving in combat in the military, that really killed the ERA.

Kim c: I have been pointing

Kim c:

I have been pointing out this same inconsistency for years now. Just not with scripture to back me up. I am non religious but have been practicing being a decent person since my mother taught me at a young age. What has baffled me for so long is how so- called "true Christians" can completely ignore all of what Christ himself stood for and against. He clearly hated politicians, and rich people who lacked compassion and concern for the poor. To me the biggest sin is someone who proclaims to have Christ on their side while going so far from anything he taught.

Thank you for your comments. I will be using them (giving you proper credit of course) to prove my point in the future.

Of course Phyllis would not

Of course Phyllis would not advocate hiring single mothers either. Execute homosexuals, among others, and let women who leave their husbands starve in the streets with their dirty little illegitimates. They made their beds there, those hussies and their little rats, let them sleep in it. So saith Lady Phyllis' Lord of Laxatives in his XXX Playboy addition.

Kim C nailed it! What truly

Kim C nailed it! What truly frightens me about this, though, is that people like Schlafly -- and armies of Teabaggers, Dominionists and other fruitbats -- seemingly lack the mental agility to recognize their own hypocrisy. It's as if a whole level of normal human intelligence -- the capacity for ironical self-reflection -- is missing in action, creating what might as well be a separate branch of humanity mentally mired in hallucinatory doublethink. Then there are those at the top of that particular food chain who are apparently not hobbled by this mental defect, but knowingly and cynically exploit it to manipulate the herd for their own ends. This is a very, very dangerous thing! Those of us who see this should realize that this growing herd is rapidly and purposefully being turned into a mob that would love to see all of us liberal smart-folk torched on the tines of pitchforks...

I remember what my father

I remember what my father told me about the 1930's DEPRESSION , there was no welfare , no unemployment compensation , his hours were cut down from 40 hours a week to 20 hours a week . He did not sit back on his butt and whine but he went out to the wealthier areas of town and looked for small jobs to make up for the lost income . He did quite well . I learned my fathers and mothers work ethic and thrift and have succeeded quite well thank you . I worked 12 hours a day in my own restaurant's [ for 34 years ] . The so called " POOR " in most cases never put in the effort to get ahead in life and yet they all have cell phones , flat screen T.V.'s
, welfare payments , free breakfast and lunches for their kids in school, housing subsidies , ad- nauseum . Single women with multiple boyfriends and children , if they were civilized and intelligent would take precautions and insist that their boyfriend[ s ] would also take precautions . But why should they when society is so STUPID that we willingly work 40 to 60 hours a week and don't question why we should subsidize parasites. I may be my brothers keeper but I am not your sugar daddy.

Kim C...my hat is off to

Kim C...my hat is off to you. Arminius, sir it is clear you are no Christian. You also have bought the Republican Kool-Aid bullshit about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Great if you have boots. I agree that the caricature you present does exist, it is in far fewer numbers than the politicos represent to us. By the way, you clearly have no idea how that system works. Since Clinton dismantled it in the '90's, you can only be on limited assistance for a short time, during which you must find and keep a job. Usually in order to make any kind of sustaining living, you must work at least two jobs. Meanwhile, who takes care of your children? The streets, the gangs, since you cannot afford child care. Way to raise the next generation of single moms and fodder for the prison industrial complex.

Kim C also might consider

Kim C also might consider looking into how hard it is to get back up once you are down. Numerous studies by very bright people have connected the dots. When you are poor, there are fewer 'breaks', less "luck", you pay cash for everything, you pay higher APR if you get credit, you can't afford a healthier house in the suburbs, you must work more hours (2-3 jobs) with zero benefits to keep you healthy (especially if you are female), and the constantly oppressing judgmental attitudes, bias and ignorance of the 'other' are there at every turn, not with a hand to help you up, but a boot on your neck to keep you in your place.

The free lunch programs are

The free lunch programs are a great thing in America. Frankly, I think the free lunch should be extended to all public school students so that people don't have to go through the process of qualifying, and so that students aren't marginalized on the basis of income. I don't think schools should have the right to know how much students' parents make.

There's a lot of money that could be saved simply by instituting healthier and more nutritious meals, and cutting out all of the junk. Not to mention that many schools could start their own gardens, and growing their own food, with students preparing it themselves in kitchens. This is already being done in some innovative public high schools, as showcased by the Obama administration in the competition to have the president speak at a h.s. commencement.

As for cell phones, they're really a necessity these day. Many people do without landlines at this point to save money, and opt for cell phones instead, especially if they're parents. In our schools, by h.s., I don't think there's one student without a cell phone. It's even a critical safety issue. The school doesn't even have phone booths anymore for students to use.

I was in town the other day, and a man couldn't find a public phone booth. They're being phased out in neighborhoods.

Plus, it's a safety issue for parents who drive in old cars and in rougher neighborhoods. People need cells these days.

I'm all for putting the technology aside, at times, but let's be real about what's required to live normally in our society, find work, make money, and be safe and well.

Internet too is becoming increasingly critical in homes. Much moreso, for many, than cable. To me, cable is almost passe. It's the internet that's important. Students need it very much, too. It's very important for school.