Mustard Street Weighs-In on Lonsberry Controversy
Our favorite non-monroerising.com blogger, Philbrick over on Mustardstreet.blogspot.com, has written a typically well written piece on the latest Bob Lonsberry controversy. According to Philbrick:
Lonsberry is justified in his frustration over schools spending resources on programs for single-mother students, instead of devoting resources to preventing those pregnancies in the first place. He’s right in saying that it sends some very wrong signals.
However, in other ways Lonsberry is wrong. First, for criticizing the existence of these programs. Regardless of what should have or could have happened, the schools have students with babies and without husbands. It does no one any good to let them slip further behind. We’re glad the City school district is offering programs to help them succeed.
Lonsberry is also wrong for focusing exclusively on behavior as the sole issue here. We agree that one of the most important messages the schools can impart, in settings where there are no parents or community culture to impart it, is “Don’t have babies until you’re married. Don’t get married until you’re at least 21.” (We’ll take the complaining church people seriously when we see them advocating that message as vigorously as they denounce Lonsberry.) Encouraging abstinence until marriage is part of getting that message across, but human nature is going to assert itself, especially where there’s no reinforcement of the message whatsoever outside of school.
That’s where programs to promote and provide access to birth control come in, and why they’re needed.
Philbrick — we hope this is the start of more post on your site. We check you site daily and are disappointed when long periods go by between pieces. You are on of our area’s best!
One Response to “Mustard Street Weighs-In on Lonsberry Controversy”
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I agree, Philbrick’s opinion is the most well-reasoned, well-stated comment I’ve seen on this topic, and I agree with what he says.
I listened to Lonsberry regularly for years after he first came on WHAM, and liked his work in the Times/Union. Although I didn’t agree with some of what he had to say, he often made well-stated arguments, and generally seemed interested in working to improve Rochester as a community. He also was civil with those of differing viewpoints and was willing to bring them on to his program.
Unfortunately, Lonsberry found that lack of civility increased his ratings, and that ruined his program for me. Now with Lonsberry, everyone who disagrees with him degrades into him saying “you’re an idiot”, or “you’re such a moron” or even worse if you check out his replies to comments on his website.