I mean, Gustafson26 here boldly calling to starve the third through fifth children of that woman as an object lesson in the value of hard work presumably also supports a 100% estate tax, so we're good there, right?

Have you ever heard of second generation terrorist syndrome?

Oh, I didn't realise we're widening the anti-immigration brief to include not only actual immigrants but generations after them who were born in the UK. Ingenious!

If we go back far enough in time maybe we can get rid of everyone who isn't 100% Ancient Briton, leaving us with a population of about 7.

My theory is that children REALLY need two parents. Can it be done with one parent? Absolutely, I firmly believe that. Should it be done? No. I never understood this until I had children. It takes two parents. I find it interesting that when I talk to other parents who are in similar situations, we all have the same stories. We play "good cop/bad cop". The fathers are the more stern ones. The mothers are the more easy-going ones. My role is to be the disciplinarian, and I can actually see it in how it impacts the child. They really do change their behavior.

I couldn't imagine how difficult it must be to raise a child with one parent, and I don't see how it can be done effectively (obviously it can be because we see it often). It must be utterly exhausting.

I think men need their fathers. The crime rate only impacts black males, not black females. So what is happening here? I'm interested in knowing what happens to females raised without mothers to see if there are detrimental impacts on the females if we reverse the situation. I would suspect we would see some issues.

I now understand why conservatives were so apprehensive about gay marriage and about gay people being able to adopt/raise children. They were scared of what the results may be. To be clear, I support gay marriage. Always have. But I get why other people were concerned when it came to the kids.

I am unsure if most of the problems stem from the financial impact (two people financially is obviously better than one), or from the lack of an actual father. I would suspect a bit of both. Also, what happens in a gay family where the child has two mothers or two fathers? A male child with two mothers still lacks a father, so are their statistics as bad as a single mother household?

I've looked up some of the studies and it seems the sampling is in question. I'm also sure that the bias is towards showing statistics that only support gay marriage. If anyone has some studies we can look at, please feel free to post them.

Again, I'm very open to the idea I could be totally wrong about this, but as I get older it really seems to point in the direction of single motherhood being a root cause.

Another view into the contorted wormhole of a mind that is wil318466.

He's right. Children are viewed as a source of income by some. Of course, not by all, but definitely by some. I've heard many stories. My best friend's wife (who I've known for 15 years) now does some sort of educational assessments/social work. She has witnessed first hand parents who do everything they can to get their children labelled with learning disabilities or mental handicaps in order to receive more benefits/money.

She couldn't understand what was happening at first. She would tell the parents the child is not autistic, expecting a positive reaction. She often got the exact opposite.

I'm not suggesting widening anything, just asking if you have heard of it and are you aware that it is a known phenomenon.

What, exactly, is controversial about that statement, especially in light of the statistics of children raised in single parent households?

This is a good place to start: http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/t...sbian-parents/

Also, I will probably respond to your last response to me at some point but I don't have time right now.

The crime rate was rising before the drug wave.

This should actually make you *more* concerned. It's exactly why people are so worried - the children of these people are doing these things. I would feel BETTER if the attackers weren't born here and their children turned out fine.

Are you really this stupid?

I have no idea what any of this means except for the 4th sentence.

wil, I'm sorry to do this as the above appears to be a rare honest post from you, but do you have any answers to my questions? I had two questions that I think were pretty specific and clear, and you quoted them, but answered neither.

I would also feel better, and it's a question I posed as an alternative to juank's blanket ban on immigration thesis.
There have also been white Britons found guilty of acts of Islam terrorism.

You don't solve a problem of young, gullible people being brainwashed by evil bastards into blowing themselves and others up by banning all immigration from certain countries; it's an unwarranted kneejerk reaction.

You have to study the problem until you understand its causes, then tackle those causes.

They couldn't care less about adoption or raising of children. They're homophobes and Jesus freaks looking to justify bigotry. And there's zero evidence of any ill effects with regards to children raised by gay couples. SSM has been legal in Massachusetts since 2004, Iowa since 2009, several other Northeastern states since 2011, and everywhere since the middle of 2015 (not to mention the fact that gay couples were raising children before same-sex marriages anyway) If there were a problem, it'd have arisen by now. There isn't any, nor will there be.

Having both parents alive for the majority of one's life is great. However, for a variety of reasons since the beginning of time, it hans't been the case for many people. And plenty get by just fine.

The definition of conservatism will change over time so that in 2035 or 2040 or 2050, "conservatives" will have different views and different prioritized issues than they do now.

You'll also see fewer overall of any kind of conservative, since tons will die off. Conservatism today is heavily skewed towards the 55+ crowd, many of whom will be dead 20 years from now.

Liberals won't die off, unless for some reason you feel that millions are people under the age of 35 are going to vanish or croak.

Ok. Prove it. Show me the stats and I'll publicly admit I'm wrong.

ahaha wtf every time i think we've hit peak wil there's something new

Tough thing to quantify, and I'm sure plenty of people raised in single-parent households have had difficulty, but one is not drawing dead in the game of life if their father passes away or goes to prison or whatever.

y'all know he's talking about indirect eugenics, right? y'all know that?

i'm in a dream within a dream

hey guys black people were much more secure when they lived in the master's big house THINK ABOUT IT

Dude. No one has ever said this.

I'm asking you to prove that children raised in single mother households , especially men, are equally as well off as children raised with two parents.

Please post results.

Bull****. You are immune to stats and everyone here knows it. If you cared about stats at all you would be siting sources for your hot takes on welfare moms and would understand that the murder rates are at all time lows for most of the country.

Name your price.

I question all data from the left. Everything. It's usually lies and nonsense. I don't even believe global warming or min wage laws anymore.

I guess I can stop calling myself a liberal.