NY GRAND JURY VOTES TO INDICT TRUMP

[Landroval]

It's no secret the Left has been attacking the normalization of nuclear familiarity over the past several decades. They want a US culture of Poors with low impulse control to perpetuate economic growth. This is also why they don't really market to middle-aged white men, as it's not very lucrative to do so, except to market "status" and/or "survival" products, on occasion when they do. There's more money to be made in marketing to women, and homosexuals, and now, transgendered people who turn a decent profit for the pharmaceutical and medical industries.

[Origen]

If that was what we wanted, you'd think we'd get more support from the capitalists because I am pretty sure that's what we already have.

The average American has little savings and little hope of retirement.

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Conservative news outlets have taken aim at the celebrations in recent weeks, in much the same way they have targeted identity-based housing in recent years. Campus Reform, a right-wing online publication group has push this agenda using Fox News and The Daily Mail.

It is important to note that these separate celebrations are nothing new and have been rooted in culture concerns in the past. For example California State University, Northridge, has been providing Black graduation celebration since 1972.

“Segregated graduation ceremonies exemplify how leftist ideas such as Critical Race Theory or Queer Theory construct artificial binaries to divide students into ‘us’ and ‘them,’” Campus Reform editor in chief Zachary Marschall.

But the real focus of the attack has been the reoccurring theme to excite the core values of the conservative voter base after the dwindling confidence resulting from the presidential election. A student dressing differently from their gender during college and university graduating ceremonies more over seems to be the outrage.

As these attacks get more vicious in nature some institutions have also increased the number of affinity graduations they offer, in many cases adding special ceremonies for LGBTQ+ students (often referred to as a lavender graduation).

Having separate celebrations for black communities has never been an issue for most attending conservative party members attending their child's graduation. But as the agenda pushes forward eliminating LGBTQ+ is the emphasis on this conservative political crusade.


... AKA conservative politicians need GOP voters to get organized and motivated push this issue it is an affront to the traditional Christian values.
This is sad since the consulting echo chamber by right entertainers are getting paid to push this filth and then while they are at it to make some grifting cash on the side by selling some phone plans. I can't believe people like Baler fall for this.

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don’t care if colleges want to bring segregation back, personally I think most of society even independents see it as a bad look for them

Don’t see what Christianity has to do with it. “Then Moses said “thou shalt not separate thy races”

When 82% of your voter base is Christian you better believe the GOP politicians are aiming at that flock of sheep.



.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Origen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't have any issues with polygamy as long as everyone is a consenting adult. I was raised in a fairly boring nuclear family myself, which has since shattered and scattered.

I'm always skeptical when I see anyone claiming that this or that structure of a family is "right" or "wrong", we've all heard that phrase "It takes a village to raise a child" for a reason, despite the fact that most of us probably were not raised in something at the scale of a village.

If I had to rank the factors that help a child:

1. Values of the parent(s) that will be passed down to the child - most important, most helpful in life. A kid with lots of inherited money but a shitty value-system will still end up broke and alone eventually

2. Household income - usually better with 2 parents

3. Community/extended family - For a sense of belonging and productive/constructive socialization. This is where I personally see the “village” quote

[Landroval]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Doesn’t explain why black families in America up until a particular point of time in history had much better rates of married nuclear households though. I’m just unfamiliar with when this shifted to the 70%+ single parent that now exists

Actually it does. Under the thumb of the post-colonial West, nuclear familiarity amongst African American peoples was strongly encouraged due to the lack of opportunity for black women (and women in general)

[Landroval]

Originally Posted by Origen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If that was what we wanted, you'd think we'd get more support from the capitalists because I am pretty sure that's what we already have.

The average American has little savings and little hope of retirement.

What is child support not being considered in the determination of eligibility toward government benefits for low-income families?

[Origen]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If I had to rank the factors that help a child:

1. Values of the parent(s) that will be passed down to the child - most important, most helpful in life. A kid with lots of inherited money but a shitty value-system will still end up broke and alone eventually

2. Household income - usually better with 2 parents

3. Community/extended family - For a sense of belonging and productive/constructive socialization. This is where I personally see the “village” quote

I'm half of a DINK. We recently inquired through our church about potentially hosting foster kids. We were ruled out instantly. You can probably guess why. It was depressing for a few weeks, but it's understandable.

Originally Posted by Landroval [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What is child support not being considered in the determination of eligibility toward government benefits for low-income families?

I do not understand this question.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Origen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm half of a DINK. We recently inquired through our church about potentially hosting foster kids. We were ruled out instantly. You can probably guess why. It was depressing for a few weeks, but it's understandable.

I can’t guess why tbh, but your willingness to do is very commendable and you may have dodged a bullet

I see the worst of the worst in my job, but I have the opinion that most foster families don’t know what they are getting themselves into, behavior-wise

Picture the worst possible behaviors you can imagine from a child, including assault and property damage, and be prepared for their possibility with a game plan ready

The amount of foster moms that call for help crying saying they are locked in a room from their young foster kid for their own safety is astounding

[Landroval]

One of my wife's best friends, a latina woman, married a Jewish man who works in bidding on large-scale commercial construction projects (who then sells the contracts to actual construction companies) got awarded 5,500$/month in child support for one, of her two children from different dads, and she lives in income-qualified section 8 housing, with food stamps and the whole rigamarole, and it's all on the up and up.

[Landroval]

If a woman in the US wants to be a loafer, her best chance of doing so, is to ensure her children are sired by multiple men, so as to maximize her residual tax-free non-income income. That is a government-sponsored legal framework conducive to polygynial structuralization