Unless you address the abuse of the welfare system, all that effectively accomplishes is putting a disproportionate economic burden on productive single men that are not part of the problem to begin with, because they are not the men that these single moms are getting knocked up by.
And the productive single men have little reason to marry tax credits or not, when in practice a woman can renege on the marriage contract and take half or more of the commingled assets despite whether or not she actually contributed a proportionate amount thereof.
Basically society needs to both stop rewarding people for bad decision making and also stop reassigning the consequences of such to others.
Only doing one or the other is not going to fix the issue.
...we use to have shotgun weddings for that. The argument is now rather than making the guy take responsibly we hand out welfare checks and thereby discourage marriage since the state replaces the man as the provider for the child and mother.
Yessir. The bleeding hearts say it's so cruel to force people to marry that aren't compatible with each other. Well, maybe they should have thought about that before sticking that dick into that pussy?
Realistically, society needs to hold both men and women accountable for their mistakes. Right now, only men are being punished.
I was thinking a mass shaming campaign followed by making stuff like adultry illegal again. Then going down the line of degeneracy and outlawing or making it so shameful that very few do it.
Are you also in favor of burning heretics at the stake? That's was done forever too.
So no homosexuality between consenting adults?...then using an undefined term like "perversion" again, who gets to define that? The church? Because, you know...it always worked out so well when the church ran countries.
We had laws against adultery and homosexuality in this country only 70 years ago. Moral laws don't equate a theocracy or we would have been one most of our Republic's existence.
Those are theocratic laws. In a sense, the Republic has been theocratic. That's part of the reason behind the rebellion that started with women's suffrage, and the 60's flower power.
Get the government out of the relationship business entirely. There is no divorce because there is no marriage. The declarations of marriage are handled by the church as a religious practice, and the government may neither recognize nor enforce nor establish it due to the first amendment. Your church decides when you are married and divorced, to the extent that you respect your church's decision or are wiling to choose a different church and/or religion. This also means no child support, no alimony, no child-based welfare perks for unwed mothers, and a cheating woman who drives her man away with incessant nagging gets kicked out to the curb on her own to deal with the consequences of her actions, unless the the church is willing to provide its funds as charity, because the church has no legal authority to enforce these things with. If you want to deal with the fatherlessness epidemic, you have to stop rewarding women for making fatherless homes.
If you'll look at the comic again, getting the next generation is the least of our issues. And marriage has less than ever to do with it. And yes, I'm a libertarian on many stances. I don't actually care what's in the government's best interest, I care what's in the people's best interest. Government doesn't need this power, it just wants it for its own sake. And so it shouldn't have it. When homes with fathers are promoted, you'll get your next generation in a better way, and they'll be better for it.
It seems to me most Republicans (and conservatives in general) are a bunch of fucking cunts. We get power, we do nothing with it. The shitlibs get power, they ram a broomstick up our keister. We get power again, we don't even roll back the damage, just hold the line again.
For fucks sakes even WITH Trump in power right now, it's basically the same deal. The problem is that as of about a decade or so, the left has too much power. What it would take for us to turn the tide means we are risking everything, even death. So instead, we will die slowly as the communists take us apart piece by piece.
And how do we address it exactly. "Forced monogamy" like Peterson suggested?
Just spitballing, but maybe give tax credits to married couples?
Removing welfare benefits for single mothers is the first and most effective step.
I want to create multiple accounts just to upvote this comment more.
This.
Unless you address the abuse of the welfare system, all that effectively accomplishes is putting a disproportionate economic burden on productive single men that are not part of the problem to begin with, because they are not the men that these single moms are getting knocked up by.
And the productive single men have little reason to marry tax credits or not, when in practice a woman can renege on the marriage contract and take half or more of the commingled assets despite whether or not she actually contributed a proportionate amount thereof.
Basically society needs to both stop rewarding people for bad decision making and also stop reassigning the consequences of such to others.
Only doing one or the other is not going to fix the issue.
Agreed; welfare reform is a fantastic idea.
This is the only reason the government has anything to do with marriage in the first place.
16 year old girls getting pumped by Chad don't care about tax credits man. lol
No, but it may help curb the single mom epidemic by discouraging divorce.
Oh for that, just eliminate no fault divorce. Right now a woman can simply decide she wants to get divorced, and the courts will give it to her.
Make it so that the woman has to give a valid reason for wanting to divorce. "He doesn't excite me anymore" is not a valid reason.
And even then, if she can't get the divorce, she'll still get pumped on the side by gigaChad from Facebook.
Taking the female favor out of the courts would help more more than giving a tax break on the married.
...we use to have shotgun weddings for that. The argument is now rather than making the guy take responsibly we hand out welfare checks and thereby discourage marriage since the state replaces the man as the provider for the child and mother.
Yessir. The bleeding hearts say it's so cruel to force people to marry that aren't compatible with each other. Well, maybe they should have thought about that before sticking that dick into that pussy?
Realistically, society needs to hold both men and women accountable for their mistakes. Right now, only men are being punished.
How would it be exploited in a way that's worse than what's happening now?
I was thinking a mass shaming campaign followed by making stuff like adultry illegal again. Then going down the line of degeneracy and outlawing or making it so shameful that very few do it.
Jesus warned us all about this 2000 years ago. Turns out it was pretty good advice.
Who gets to define "degenerate"?
Adultery, homosexuality, pedophilia, perversion. The typical shit that's been called degenerate since forever.
Are you also in favor of burning heretics at the stake? That's was done forever too.
So no homosexuality between consenting adults?...then using an undefined term like "perversion" again, who gets to define that? The church? Because, you know...it always worked out so well when the church ran countries.
I'd say that Jesus defined it pretty well.
Well I'm about to trigger the fuck out of you.
You don't get to make law based on a bronze age mythological figure any more than anyone else does.
You don't get to just declare your deity real and make public policy based on it and no one else does.
So a theocracy. Islam maybe?
We had laws against adultery and homosexuality in this country only 70 years ago. Moral laws don't equate a theocracy or we would have been one most of our Republic's existence.
Those are theocratic laws. In a sense, the Republic has been theocratic. That's part of the reason behind the rebellion that started with women's suffrage, and the 60's flower power.
Get the government out of the relationship business entirely. There is no divorce because there is no marriage. The declarations of marriage are handled by the church as a religious practice, and the government may neither recognize nor enforce nor establish it due to the first amendment. Your church decides when you are married and divorced, to the extent that you respect your church's decision or are wiling to choose a different church and/or religion. This also means no child support, no alimony, no child-based welfare perks for unwed mothers, and a cheating woman who drives her man away with incessant nagging gets kicked out to the curb on her own to deal with the consequences of her actions, unless the the church is willing to provide its funds as charity, because the church has no legal authority to enforce these things with. If you want to deal with the fatherlessness epidemic, you have to stop rewarding women for making fatherless homes.
The government is in marriage because marriage is entangled with taxation rules. You're going to have to gut those too.
Sure, done. No marriage means no checkbox for married on your tax form. Everyone is single and checks single.
Unless they're like a conjoined twin or something.
How about court representation where someone can't be compelled to testify against their spouse?
ding ding ding ding!!! beautiful post. I could not have said it better myself.
I thought this was a porn free website but reading your comment has gotten me all riled up.
It's called a justice boner. That swelling of pride is a nationalism borne of freedom.
If you'll look at the comic again, getting the next generation is the least of our issues. And marriage has less than ever to do with it. And yes, I'm a libertarian on many stances. I don't actually care what's in the government's best interest, I care what's in the people's best interest. Government doesn't need this power, it just wants it for its own sake. And so it shouldn't have it. When homes with fathers are promoted, you'll get your next generation in a better way, and they'll be better for it.
Sorry dude, but no.
Marriage is a spiritual union that has secular benefits (inheritance, ensured/implied support for mother and children, etc.)
Breeding is easy - we've been doing that for millions of years before any government was invented.
It seems to me most Republicans (and conservatives in general) are a bunch of fucking cunts. We get power, we do nothing with it. The shitlibs get power, they ram a broomstick up our keister. We get power again, we don't even roll back the damage, just hold the line again.
For fucks sakes even WITH Trump in power right now, it's basically the same deal. The problem is that as of about a decade or so, the left has too much power. What it would take for us to turn the tide means we are risking everything, even death. So instead, we will die slowly as the communists take us apart piece by piece.
No hymen, no diamond. Compulsory paternity tests