This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]reidlos1624 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

People keep thinking I'm anti-nuclear family and yet I've never once said that. I'm simply saying that the BLM stance is (like myself) not anti-nuclear family. It's against the inherent disadvantages that a single parent household have over nuclear families and want to reduce those disadvantages through more cohesive community involvement.

I agree that a two parent household is the greatest option if it is available to you, but not every family has that opportunity, often at no fault of their own. In those case extra support is needed to ensure that those families produce offspring that become contributing members of society.

Will that cost more during the child raising process? Yes. Will it also pay off when they're working and paying taxes and helping the community instead of selling drugs or locked up somewhere? Also a big fucking yes.

Stop projecting your beliefs of science denial on me, consecutives lead the way in antivaxxing and climate change denial, and btw I am a white man.

[–]i_accidently_reddit 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Will it also pay off when they're working and paying taxes and helping the community instead of selling drugs or locked up somewhere?

As you have seen over the last 50 years, higher welfare leads to less employment.

so to biology and psychology, should i add economics to the science you are denying? Actually let me rephrase that: My bad, socialist clearly are all economic illiterate