America’s Moral Slide Recognized By Citizens, Evidenced In Youngsters

0 Shares
153006389

A majority of Americans remain pessimistic about the Nation’s moral values, according to the results of a recent poll, as a vast majority feel that moral decline is ongoing in the United States.

According to results from Gallup, 73 percent of Americans feel the Nation is headed in a morally bereft direction, while only 20 percent feel Americans are strengthening in their moral fiber.

Not only do a majority of Americans expect morals to get worse in America, but many don’t feel the greater public is very moral to begin with. Forty-four percent of Americans describe the current state of moral values in the Nation as “poor,” 36 percent describe Americans’ moral makeup as “only fair” and a paltry 19 percent feel the Nation is morally excellent.

Gallup says the bottom line is this:

Americans are just as negative in their outlook for moral values in the United States as they were last year. Similarly, Americans are about as likely as they were last year to say the current state of moral values in the country is “poor.” No major demographic group evaluates moral values positively overall, though Democrats, lower-income Americans, those who are not married, and those who attend church less regularly hold slightly more positive views.

Last year, Gallup asked Americans to give their views on the most important problem with the state of moral values. Americans were more likely to cite a lack of respect or tolerance for other people than divisive political and social issues such as abortion or same-sex marriage. So their sour outlook on U.S. values may have more to do with basic matters of civility than with the more controversial moral issues that currently divide Americans.

For anyone who spends a fair amount of time browsing the Internet, it isn’t hard to recognize why Americans as a whole feel the Nation is on the moral downslope.

Just consider these insanely vulgar youths videoed on a bus in a township near Philadelphia (language warning):

 

 
While it would seem incidents like this would be an anomaly, there are thousands of similar videos shot by appalled bystanders floating around the Internet.

And the big question for American policymakers is this: Are incidents like this a simply an unfortunate byproduct of a more “forward thinking” and tolerant culture, or an ugly consequence of liberalism run amok?

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

  • Guest

    Feeding these foul mouthed youth a bar of soap might do it….

    • Nadzieja Batki

      He would get you for assaulting him and there are many civil rights lawyers that would fall over themselves to take the case. How safe would you be if he runs as a predator pack?

      • Michael Shreve

        Indeed, three of more youths SURROUNDED by adults terrify the adults.

  • Vigilant

    “Are incidents like this a simply an unfortunate byproduct of a more “forward thinking” and tolerant culture, or an ugly consequence of liberalism run amok?”

    C’mon Libs, we’re waiting for you to drag out the First Amendment argument.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Are we filtering morality through the Bible or concensus morality. If it is through the Bible then incidents of foul mouth, theft, lying, etc., would be scarce, on the other hand concensus morality allows for the baseness of human behaviours.

      • Vigilant

        “Consensus morality” is the morality that facilitates both good and evil actions. The only “absolute” morality exists in Natural Law. and that is furnished by the Creator.

        It is our task to determine what are the dictates of Natural Law, and that is something that may take several lifetimes to ascertain.

        Secular Humanists (almost invariably atheists) believe that humankind can determine what’s right and wrong.

        • Nadzieja Batki

          You just answered as I expected you would. Then this means that we as an American society have been floating on the morality of Secular Humanists so we cannot fault the young for how they were taught to make moral choices by the oldsters or their teachers (handlers).

          • Vigilant

            Agreed. There was a time in my life when these youngsters could be chastised and actually learn something about decent behavior. That era has long passed.

      • Michael Shreve

        ENCOURAGES actually.

    • Dave

      Vigilant,

      If I am tolerant of two homosexuals marrying… can you explain how that leads to moral degradation?

      In Europe, they are not as religious as we are and yet have less babies out of wedlock, divorce, abortion than we do. So are they more moral? Maybe there is something more than just “morality”?

      How about the ability to raise children under one breadwinner? Possibly?

      There is more to this than just being “god fearing good Christians” that go to church every Sunday. Or the spectre of the evil liberal overlords ruining everything conservatives hold dear.

      • Vigilant

        Seems to be your day for misreading my posts. It’s not too hard to fathom where you’re coming from, but it addresses little if anything in my posts. Nonetheless, I’ll attempt an answer.

        I am not a Christian, so your inveighing against Christians falls on deaf ears.

        You are correct in saying “There is more to this than just being “god fearing good Christians” that go to church every Sunday.” Even Christians believe this, so it’s nothing new or controversial.

        Determining that which is moral and that which is immoral is (or should be) independent of political sentiments. But it doesn’t seem to work that way.

        You made a very interesting statement, whether you realize it or not, when you said, “If I am tolerant of two homosexuals marrying…” Now correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe you have indicated that you are indeed “tolerant” of homosexual marriage.

        Tell me please, in English usage, how you define “tolerant.” If one tolerates something, it generally refers to an activity that one doesn’t approve of, but accepts it anyway as a “minor nuisance” or such. Have you ever heard of someone “tolerating” or condoning good behavior?

        So by simply using the word “tolerant,” it conveys an immediate moral judgment, does it not? As I see it, there can be only three possibilities: (1) actively support and encourage gay marriage as a positive good, (2) “tolerate” it as bad behavior, or (3) discourage it as bad behavior.

        I’m not trying to play word games here, I’m genuinely interested in why you used the word “tolerant” in reference to gay marriage.

  • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

    This is an example of your “by products” of the liberal democrats and their “off spring”. This is a prime example of why, though I used to oppose abortion, I’m know realizing that abortion is the best option for some because they shouldn’t procreate and generate off spring like this that are likely to end up killing some innocent person in a few short years from now and we end up having to support them in some prison for the rest of their life. Better to exterminate them before they have a chance to kill innocent people.

    Though it is not initially their (kids) fault for being disrespectful animalistic punks, that accountability falls on their parents and the liberal democrats that have made it all but illegal to discipline unruly kids when they get off course like this. These kids learned that kind of behavior and language from somewhere, and its most likely mimicked from watching Dad or one of moms pimps hanging around the crib. If they haven’t already assaulted or killed someone by the age of 14 they most likely will have a long criminal history by the age of 20. Once these kids are 12 – 14 and act like that the die is cast and they are molded into the citizen they are going to likely spend the rest of their life being.

    Most liberal and democrats don’t know why Planned Parenthood was formed or the history of it, But this is an exact reason why it was created. Its creation had nothing to do with supporting women’s choice, That line is and was used as a guise for the real intentions.

    • Doc Sarvis

      ONLY about 3% of Planned Parenthood procedures are abortions. Cancer screenings, STD screenings, and providing contraception (that’s prevention) make up the vast majority of Planned Parenthood services.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        To cover sins PP has to create a caring image of cancer screening, they supposedly care for the women. If the women stopped creating their own misery the Planned Parenthood would go out of business.

        • Chester

          Planned Parenthood was created to help people have access to birth control and health services they could not afford otherwise. Take a really GOOD look at your local Planned Parenthood group and see how few pregnant women are there as opposed to single women, men, and married or co-habitating couples. Although I will go on to say that women with children do come there as well, often to get a reference to a WIC counselor.

        • Doc Sarvis

          So, I don’t suppose men have ANY role in the misery you speak of???

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Yes if you exert undue pressure on the woman and she is too much in heat to think clearly.

          • Doc Sarvis

            AND the Conservative War on Women continues.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            What has my reply to do with the “Conservative War on Women continues”? If men and women clock out their brains when they are in heat, how is it other people’s responsibility to clean up the miseries they create.?

      • Michael Shreve

        BULL. PP is up to its NECK in abortion, but limits the other services.

        • WTS/JAY

          Former Planned Parenthood worker: Planned Parenthood lies about itself. -BY CATHERINE ANTHONY ADAIR

          November 25, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In 1997, I began working at a Boston Planned Parenthood clinic as a young, idealistic college student who strongly believed in what I had been told about the organization, that I would be helping other young women access safe and affordable health care.

          But I quickly came to learn that the message Planned Parenthood advertised did not reflect reality. I was disillusioned by the betrayal that was perpetrated against patients and the public alike.

          My time there was not spent providing prenatal care to pregnant women, providing counseling or basic health care services or educating women about reproductive health.

          Instead, I spent my days urging women to terminate their pregnancies. My superiors constantly reminded me of our abortion-centered business model: abortions first, everything else came second.

          I began to recognize their emphasis on performing abortions each time a woman would express concern or have second thoughts about having an abortion. When I notified management, though, they told me not to worry and encourage her decision to move ahead with the procedure.

          Thankfully, the truth is being exposed. Sexual abuse of minor girls and exploitation of the poor and minorities is concealed or ignored, all in the name of more abortions.

          continued:
          http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-planned-parenthood-worker-planned-parenthood-lies-about-itself

      • WTS/JAY

        Abortion as Only 3% of PPFA Services?

        An increasingly common PPFA response is to say that abortion represents only 3% of all the services they provided in 2007. Technically, one can say this if every packet of pills, every test, every exam a client receives is counted as a separate service. But looked at in a more normal way, trying to see what percentage of Planned Parenthood’s customers receive abortions, we get a figure closer to 10.1%. Even that doesn’t capture the full impact.

        Abortion is quite often bundled with a number of those other services (the abortion patient often receives and pays for a number of connected services, such as Rh testing, ultrasound, STD testing, the HPV vaccine, a take-home pack of contraceptives). Thus, abortion and abortion-related services account for a much, much bigger piece of the pie than 3% or even 10%.

        Consider PPFA’s $374.7 million clinic income for the fiscal year ending June 2008.

        Though we know from its own web site that there are Planned Parenthood clinics that advertise and perform later, much more expensive abortions, if we were conservative and treated every one of PPFA’s 305,310 abortions as a standard first-trimester suction abortion, at the going rate for such abortions in 2005, Planned Parenthood’s income from abortion in 2007 would have been at least $126 million. This alone would represent more than a third of PPFA’s clinic income for the fiscal year.

        Bundled services attached to those abortions add to those revenues. And every later abortion PPFA clinics perform means hundreds of dollars more in its coffers. That explains why Planned Parenthood fights so hard for this “insignificant” part of their business.

        http://www.nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/PPAnnualReport.html

    • Vigilant

      “Better to exterminate them before they have a chance to kill innocent people.” You have just parroted Margaret Sanger’s advocation for eugenics. Which side are you on?

  • Doc Sarvis

    I place a large amount of what moral decline there is on the “me” focused aspects of our society as opposed to the “we”. Facebook and Twitter are tools built to connect folks but too often, especially among the young, they are vehicles to promote the individual. As I see it, “reality” television shows also largely promote the individual or selfish goals over working together. AND it is FAR from REAL.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Actually the reverse is true, “we-ness” makes people mind everybody’s business except their own so they are preoccupied with other people’s sins and not their own. If you are an Individualist you will not go out of the way to inflict misery as in lying, theft, predatious sexual behaviours, etc., on another human being. Choice to obey God and the choice of destroying yourself and others if you don’t obey.

    • vicki

      Borg vs independence. Not surprising really. Rulers hate independent people. Independent people know the value of consensual working together for the good each INDIVIDUAL gains from the co-operation.

  • Dave

    To here conservatives talk about morals is funny to me. When were we more moral? Was it when slavery was the law of the land? Women could not vote? Or when we broke every treaty we had with the indiginous population of this land and slaughtered them in many cases, in the name of Christianity?

    We are not any more or less moral that we were at the time of our founding…If you recall, during our founding, slavery was a moneymaking trade, women were not considered when the words were written “and all MEN are created equal”.

    Our “idea” of morality is colored by the WW2 generation that came together under a common goal to defeat the AXIS and the subsequent economic upswing after we became the only game in town in the 1950’s for manufacturing.

    I hate to break it to the people here but those days are gone. We have competition now but our attitude of feeling entitled to the world’s resources, or that we are the best without doing a darn thing to prove it, or to be the world’s police has been slow to change.

    We as the United States are no more or less moral that we ever were. We just need to do this thing called “work” to earn what we get and we need to stop the wealthy from being allowed to write laws that horde wealth for the very few.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Your social views are skewed so you are not the best judge of morals. Slavery was the most abhorrent institution but get off your high horse because it still exists in most parts of the world and it has nothing to do with Americans now. We are in fact paying for stupid choices made by slave buyers.
      Women lost when they got the vote. If they influenced their husbands and their sons as they should have the husbands and sons would have made good judgement calls on politicians. Looks and nice speeches do not make good politicians.

      • Dave

        So Nads, you are a good judge of morals? To say that morality is degenerating means that we were more moral at some point. I noted these realities in American history to illustrate that is a complete fallacy.
        Wow Nads, you would have women go backwards because of the influence the somehow lost over sons and husbands after they got the vote? Really?

        • Nadzieja Batki

          Are you responding as a man or a woman?

          • Dave

            I can be either for you if thats your thing… But can you answer my questions?
            Are you a good moral judge and do you believe women lost influence over sons and husbands when they got the right to vote? I am interested to understand how women lost this influence. Care to explain?

          • vicki

            First Principle:

            Your Creator gave you 2 gifts. Life and Free Will. How you use those gifts and how you honor them in others is how you shall be judged.

          • Dave

            My parents are my creators and they think I am a fine prson.

    • Michael Shreve

      IF you have difficulty GRASPING the concept of moral behavior, you are likely CONTRIBUTING to the problem.

      • dave

        What is “moral” behavior to you?
        I think morality extends to US corporations doing whats right by US workers first… but alas…
        Morality extends to paying peope a decent wage wile not hording all the wealth by the few but alas…
        Are you the sherrif of morality?

        • vicki

          The irony of your question to Michael is not lost.

          Corporations always do what is right by the workers or they do not survive cause the workers use their free will to go work for someone else. Using the force of government to make corporations do what YOU think is “moral” is not.

  • David169

    What did anyone expect. The rearing of children was taken from their parents by the government. Almost every child raised in the last 20 years has no concept of being responsible for their actions or that there are consequences for your actions. The worst punishment these children ever faced was a time-out in a corner. When they get caught as an adult they get severely punished. Assault somebody, go to jail; don’t make your car payment, have your car repossessed and get caught in a lie nobody trusts you again. Instead of preparing the children to be upstanding citizens the DOE has crippled two generations of citizens by destroying the family discipline of corporal punishment..

    • vicki

      And without the threat of physical force how do parents even get children to stay in their “time out” location (not always a corner)?

  • Michael Shreve

    Parent USED to demand their children be RESPECTFUL and and use only G rated language, NOW the defend their children regardless how heinous the behavior. We ALL share the blame.