You really like to see suffering and child abuse. Sex out of wedlock leads to single parent households. Single parent households lead to great numbers of children being raised in poverty. There is a close association between poverty, drug use, alcoholism, and child abuse.
urinalist just spew the narrative , they don't fact check or even a google search .
I don't like to see any such thing and you really are pathetic. I support people having the right to get married or not, that's all. That's the kind of freedom we're allowed in the West and if you're one of those who would overturn laws that would curb freedom then don't pretend that you're doing it for the sake of children. Marriage itself does not ensure a stable family. Plenty of couples who aren't married do a great job of raising their kids along with single parents. As per usual, your post is about as in touch with reality as the conspiracy sites you frequent so much...
I am not a conspiracy loon and I'll continue to wear the things for reasons outlined beforehand.
Do you live in a bomb shelter?
Oddly enough no. I don't wear a tin foil hat either.
In so far as doctrine is concerned, I'd say they're a package deal. If you place emphasis on either over the other, the inevitable result is error.
You're an idiot. The documentation of the relationship between single parents and child abuse is very solid. Also the documentation between single parent households and poverty is also documented very well. So is the documentation of the relationship between poverty and drug abuse. So is the relationship between drug abuse and child abuse.
If it's "irrational" to prefer to have laws whereby people should be able to choose whether to get married or not, then hey, "guilty as charged". It isn't but you keep telling yourself that if you want. I'm well aware of the correlation between drug/alcohol abuse and poverty but marriage doesn't suddenly solve that. You think all married couples are well off or something? That domestic abuse only usually exists with people who cohabit along with child abuse or single parents? As usual with you, it's just hyperbole and that's not to say that any such cases aren't a cause for concern. If your "solution" is to make any sort of relationship or sex outside of marriage a crime, then the idiocy is all yours.You're an idiot. The documentation of the relationship between single parents and child abuse is very solid. Also the documentation between single parent households and poverty is also documented very well. So is the documentation of the relationship between poverty and drug abuse. So is the relationship between drug abuse and child abuse.
No, there is no guarantee that a child would not be abused in a two parent household. The facts though say the odds of a child being abused is a lot higher in a single parent household.
Just look at all the following wild-eyed conspiracy sites. Your irrational defenses of immoral behavior is telling.
Poverty and Mistreatment of Children go Hand in Hand
www.nber.org
These links ought to be enough to get you started in your investigation.
Hmm, aren't you the guy who advocates "We Are Paul Revere"? Yes, I wear a mask and it certainly isn't for personal comfort. If it helps in even a small way to reduce the possibility of infection to other people then hey, if that bothers you then frankly, so what?
It's too bad you can't respond to what I actually said. I said the odds of child abuse and drug abuse go up with poverty levels and single parent households. Single parents have to deal with financial and time stressors a married couple never has to face. That raises their susceptibility to drug abuse and abusing their child/children. Supporting behavior which increases stress and drub abuse in single parent households is just flat out morally wrong. It's saying a few moments of sexual release is worth far more than the lives of the children it produces. That, ab, is pure unadulterated selfishness and and not giving a rip about the results of a person's own behavior. It's saying who cares about the results of their own impulsive behavior. But, why should I expect you to care about moral responsibilities? You don't care about anything but yourself if you do not care about the consequences of immoral behavior.
I agree. "Common sense" is a tangent and is NOT what law is based on. Sound reason and "common sense" are in no way synonymous.
You love to point out what you believe is irony and yet you cannot see the irony in the things that you post.
Hardly. I wear a mask primarily for the protection of others so your 'living in a bomb shelter' comment was ignorant to start with. You're free to believe and buy into anything as you will. I'll continue to be responsible.
It's not ironic at all. You can follow "We Are Paul Revere" all you want and similar. I'm not going to buy into any such bunk and I'll continue to wear a mask and other safety protocols without whining on about my civil liberties being infringed upon.
We are all so proud of you.
Oh, okay, thanks for the holier than thou lecture there ffreeloader. I'll continue to support the freedoms and liberties we have in our respective countries no matter how much that may offend your religious sensibilities. If you support laws that would make the aforementioned crimes, then you're only underlining how it's the far religious right that want to curtail them, which was my original point in regards to Clete.