Random Politics & Religion #18

Hey. Strip clubs are much more ethical ways to separate a man from his money than divorce court.

Think on that one.

Ok I'll contest that last point. Parents still married probably my have a higher chance of working it out and staying married than parents who divorce.

Pretty sure that here is no more dangerous living situation for a child to be in than with a single parent (that eventually starts dating again).

Even then it would be subjective.

How can we, or even the courts, define what is better?

Situation 1: Two parents get a divorce. The father is a drunkard, who becomes very violent while intoxicated, but is also a CEO at a local, mid-level business making almost 7 figures a year. The mother is a meek, under-developed (due to a birth defect) woman who cannot work, but is loving and caring for the child/ren.

Situation 2: Two parents get a divorce. The father is an Iraq vet who collects disability due to his leg being blown off during the war, and doesn't have a job to support himself. He suffers from PTSD. The mother is a high-earning socialite who's main job is to create medicine that helps cure cancer.

In situation 1, the father can financially provide for the child, but the child may not have the best situation when it comes to attention and care. While the mother can take care of the child, she cannot be there for the child during social events (graduation, sports, band, etc.) and cannot provide for the family itself. Which is the court going to allow to stay with?

In situation 2, the father has the ability to care for the child, both financially and figuratively, but not emotionally. The mother can care for the child financially and emotionally, but not figuratively (no time to take care of the child if you are always in research mode). Which parent gets the kid?

The answer is never easy, and the answer is never correct, because not enough information is given about any of the parents in regards to how they handle certain situations (given that those situations generally haven't occurred yet). The courts could decide to give the child to the mother in situation 1, but in an alternate universe, where the child went to the father, they may had a more fulfilling life because of having to deal with a drunkard father.

We will never know, ever.

As someone with a stepfather who was worlds more influential in a positive fashion than his biological father, I can confidently call your assertion false.

Which is why I said there are far, far too many variables in play.

You're right. Which ultimately is what I'm saying.

In any given situation of this nature no specific predetermined outcome can be considered "correct."

That said, joint custody is a thing for a reason.

No it's pretty *** clear that single mother households create a very bad childhood experience. Majority of criminals are from single mother households. The statistics are horrifying, children from households with both parents, or multiple strong family figures, do far better throughout their life. They are less likely to do drugs (as habitual user), less likely to drop out of highschool, less likely to be convicted of a crime so on and so forth.


Now it doesn't need to be the biological mother and father, just two or more strong adult figures preferably of multiple genders. So a kid living with his mom and some sort of strong parental figures like an older brother, grandfather, uncle, sister and so forth. The idea is that multiple responsible adults being involved in the child's life help the child form a positive self image and reinforces positive behaviors. It really does take a "village" to raise a kid, not a TV set.

Perhaps I'm relying too much on my personal experience, but when I say "single parent household" I don't mean that one parent is the only adult figure in the child's life.

Yes, that would be problematic from many standpoints.

I don't think that they are the sole cause. A majority of criminals were also raised in areas with high crime. When you see somebody commit a crime and (mostly) get away with it, you tend to follow in their footsteps.

I highly doubt that being raised by a single mother (or father) is a factor in this analysis.

It's a factor in the same way the crime is a factor in playing a role in causing single parent issues in the first place. Poor areas with high crime are a breeding pit (no pun intended) of correlation/causation problems because all these issues each perpetuate and are perpetuated in turn by the other issues.

This one is easy, you give the mom 50% of the guys property, including stock in his company, along with 25~30% of his yearly income and any bonus's or future income increase's he receives. Same as the second situation.

In both situations the kid is raised by a nanny while the mom is out "finding herself again".

Mandatory prenuptial agreements should be a thing.

Well at least you're in my corner on that one.

FWIW, I think divorce should be more difficult.

But I also think the legal act of marriage should be more difficult.

But I think a lot of things that aren't really practical, so who the *** knows.

It is a factor a huge one. Our biology has our children develop their primary behavioral templates at a very young age and they do this by observing how adults around them act. If the child only has one or even no healthy adults to observe, then it will end up with destructive behaviors.

It's not that the parents themselves need to be present, just that there needs to be several adults who demonstrate healthy behaviors and social interactions. Step parents, uncles, grand parents, coaches, strong teachers, even a neighbor who's also a strong family friend.

Yeah. It's not impossible to grow up and be successful and well-adjusted in s situation lacking those things....but it's certainly a much greater challenge.

This place looks so weird when everyone agrees!

I disagree with this.

No one asked you greenie...

What a day,

Revives the Dakota Pipeline, issues gag order on EPA, doubles down on belief that there was massive voter fraud but will not pursue a formal investigation.

Wonder what tomorrow will bring?

Any rerouting of the pipeline at least, or no?

Also, what's the deal with the EPA gag order? What precisely is the point? Anything that they shouldn't be discussing publically should already have been under wraps by written policy, anything else seems like fair play to discuss. What are they not supposed to talk about? How they're being gutted?

Won the WH but can't stop crying about losing the popular vote.

I've got to think that ends soon. We all know his ego is having a hard time with it but someone in the GOP is going to call him on it soon. "Look, you've got the big chair, quit whining already. It doesn't matter."

A formal investigation probably.

I was raised by a TV and I turned out almost normal !

Into why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch, and how Donald can put that to work for him.

It's the cinnamon swirls but don't let anyone know this...

I also know how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie pop...I put that on my resume.

Sounds like you're qualified for a cabinet position.