Bob Patterson has a piece in Philly's Inquirer on President Taft's creation of the U.S. Children's Bureau. Headed by Julia C. Lathrop, the Bureau was a "Progressive initiative that sought to protect both motherhood and childhood from the emerging industrialized order":
(Lathrop was a) social conservative (who) believed that maternity - by generating new life for society - trumped the demands of industry and commerce. Considering motherhood "the most important calling in the world," she worked tirelessly to give the at-home mother "the status of a profession".... Lathrop's successor, Florence Kelley, shared the same goals, safeguarding the "fundamental rights of children," including a "normal home life" and childhood that presumed married parents and maternal care and nurture through the early teen years.
"Childhood that presumed married parents and maternal care and nurture through the early teen years." A century ago our civil magistrates created economic policies that honored fatherhood and motherhood. Today they create economic policies that honor sodomy.
These social ideals, in turn, begat another: a living wage for families. ...Others, too, embraced the imperative of "family wages" for fathers, an innovation that Henry Ford pioneered for his assembly-line workers in 1914. A later bureau director, Katherine Lenroot, declared: "The primary essential of child welfare" is "a living wage for the father."
There is an inseparable connection between the father getting a family wage and the children getting a mother. Feminist shrews hate the "family wage" because it gives dignity to the profession they despise: motherhood.
But if you love motherhood, you pay fathers enough to support mothers who stay home and raise the next generation. Motherhood is a profession and fathers should bring home enough money to support that profession.
Think of all the things our Masters in Washington make much of providing for us, and all we humiliate ourselves by begging them for. Then ask yourself why the government has not lifted a finger to provide mothers for our nation's children? And no—not breast pumps and daycare workers. We don't want to stand under our umbrellas watering our tomatoes.
A century ago in his essay, "Drift from Domesticity," Chesterton comments on the government paying "officials," salaried childcare workers, while mothers are off in an office, earning money and pumping in the break room:
There is supposed to be an endless supply of salaried persons, and of salaries for them; and they are to undertake all that human beings naturally do for themselves; including the care of children. ...The actual effect of this theory is that one harassed person has to look after a hundred children, instead of one normal person looking after a normal number of them. Normally that normal person is urged by a natural force, which costs nothing and does not require a salary; the force of natural affection for his young, which exists even among the animals. If you cut off that natural force, and substitute a paid bureaucracy, you are like a fool who should pay men to turn the wheel of his mill, because he refused to use wind or water which he could get for nothing. You are like a lunatic who should carefully water his garden with a watering-can, while holding up an umbrella to keep off the rain.
So we're left with the vapidity of "equal pay for equal work" and a national economy built upon working mothers. Are Christians really so surprised that Egalitarianism spawns such evil? Can we not be transformed by the renewing of our minds instead of being conformed to the patterns of this evil world?
Alas, around the world the destroyers have had their way so that even Reformed churches in Africa have given themselves over to the two-income pursuit of wealth, abandoning their covenant children to be raised by their housekeeper.
There is such a thing as systemic evil and it is the work of the Christian city father, the Job of today, to root it out and destroy it. Where are the Reformed men who have the faith to go against Egalitarianism, the reigning ideology of our day, exposing it as the demon it is? Where are the Jobs of today who are known for breaking the jaws of the oppressor, snatching the babies from them and returning them to their mothers' wombs? Snatching the women from them and returning them to their homes and children?
The Christian father is not content to cultivate his own garden. He stands at the city gates and is known there for his defense of the widow and orphan.