Let's begin with the idea that I don't have the first idea what you're talking about, nor anything resembling the first inclination to care, since I'm quite comfortable in my belief that effort leading to ownership beats dependency leading to subjugation in all forms. Whatever fanciful pyrrhic victory you've cooked up in the meth lab that is your head matters so little to me that I'd rather let you have it then investigate. If you'd like to rephrase it in this thread ("that other thread"...as if there's less than five. Sure.), I'm happy to indulge. If not, I can assure you: just as well.
Moral Monday
- Thread starter BeachBumDeac
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Let's begin with the idea that I don't have the first idea what you're talking about, nor anything resembling the first inclination to care, since I'm quite comfortable in my belief that effort leading to ownership beats dependency leading to subjugation in all forms. Whatever fanciful pyrrhic victory you've cooked up in the meth lab that is your head matters so little to me that I'd rather let you have it then investigate. If you'd like to rephrase it in this thread ("that other thread"...as if there's less than five. Sure.), I'm happy to indulge. If not, I can assure you: just as well.
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
oh and thanks for the gratuitous insults on your way out.
I really do wish you would actually engage in some discussion on these topics, because I think you're a smart guy. But when challenged you just re-re-re-post your conclusions and pretend you've won the argument. Do judges let you get away with that in court?
Last edited:
To the extent it rebuts the notion that effort/ownership beats dependency/subjugation, holla at your boy.
WakeandBake
Well-known member
What are the orphanage statistics now compared to then? what about the 'asylums' that children born with mental disorders were committed to then compared to the ones living at home with their parents on aid?
You must have all this information to formulate your theory, jhmd. You are passionate about this. I know you must have it.
You must have all this information to formulate your theory, jhmd. You are passionate about this. I know you must have it.
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
Faith based political theory.
It isn't that hard. I want the statistic to be 0% of American children are conceived with the idea that will be left at the alter of the State to provide for them, since that is an awful, awful life. We can do better. If you're going to point out that I don't have the data on the subjective, personal thoughts of women I've never met that would differentiate between the orders of that 1/2 of all babies, I will gladly concede that I can't speak for each of them. But it's hard not to see that some of them have that plan. Precisely how many? Easy answer: Far, far, far too many, and it's not hard to see how they got there. And it certainly doesn't mean that it's not a problem, as you seem to imply. It is. Manifestly so.
WakeandBake
Well-known member
The good ole days!!
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
Seriously dude. Your whole argument can be summed up as follows:
1. Single parent households are bad.
2. Welfare is bad.
3. ?????
4. Therefore, I conclude that big government is causing single parent households.
All we're trying to do is get you to fill in that giant, gaping hole in your argument. All you have are two conclusions mashed together. Again I ask you: does this shit pass muster when you appear in court?
Let me guess: You join W&B to share the aspiration that one day your daughters will raise children out of wedlock, dependent on the charity/indifference/inefficiencies of the State to provide for them? Or is that only good enough for others?
Most of the people I meet in Court understand basic human nature. No offense.
WakeandBake
Well-known member
You are operating on the assumption that the welfare state created a phenomenon of fatherless children that is eating away at the nation.
I am saying give me something to compare it to, a point in history pre-welfare state. give me the numbers now, and then.
I think there have always been babies born out of wedlock because people like to fuck, and a lot of men like to ditch the women they impregnate.
I think it was dealt with differently in the past and often very cruelly because of social norms and expectations.
Until I know the statistics and how they were collected etc, I cannot make an informed call on whether or not it is worse now than it was.
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
I don't believe that the availability of a social safety net is going to cause my daughter to be a single mother.
Let me reverse the question: You clearly believe that the availability of the social safety net is damn near determinative in the decision of a woman to have a child out of wedlock. How do you plan to overcome that huge obstacle and convince your daughter to refrain from doing so, since the temptation to have a baby and live on $300 a month is so overwhelming?
Let me reverse the question: You clearly believe that the availability of the social safety net is damn near determinative in the decision of a woman to have a child out of wedlock. How do you plan to overcome that huge obstacle and convince your daughter to refrain from doing so, since the temptation to have a baby and live on $300 a month is so overwhelming?
WakeandBake
Well-known member
tell us about the good old days, jhmd. You're a history guy, right? tell us about life in America after industrialization and before the welfare state.
I think I've produced that data probably ten times. As 923 would say, go check "the other thread."
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
the difference being, of course, that I actually provided a link to 'the other thread'.
WakeandBake
Well-known member
I'm coming around, I think he is right.
I think the aid should be cut off, and instead of a check showing up in their mailbox, it should be a letter and a map showing them the way to the nearest church, synagogue, or mosque instructing them that if they need money for formula or for shelter they need to get it there. There, they can be shamed for being dirty whores and worthless cum repositories, and the children can be put in orphanages and jhmd's tithe can pay for it. The mothers can then be put in workhouses. You know, like the good ole days.
I think the aid should be cut off, and instead of a check showing up in their mailbox, it should be a letter and a map showing them the way to the nearest church, synagogue, or mosque instructing them that if they need money for formula or for shelter they need to get it there. There, they can be shamed for being dirty whores and worthless cum repositories, and the children can be put in orphanages and jhmd's tithe can pay for it. The mothers can then be put in workhouses. You know, like the good ole days.
Last edited:
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
Only if we can put the Catholics in charge of the little boys. We know that worked.
I think we've reached our end point. You guys are content to numb the symptoms, that their lot in life is good enough for them. Any other ideas have to be ill-intended. No other possible explanation. Congrats, and sleep tight.
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
have a good weekend.