Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Teenagers more likely to be mentally healthy if their parents are conservative

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Sam View Post

    In a 2011 Gallup survey, 57% of the wealthiest 1% in USA identified as Republican/Lean Republican and twice as many identified as "conservative" than "liberal".

    ScreenShot00160.png

    -Sam
    Depends on how you define "wealthy" - moving that line allows you to come up with whatever poll results you want. Not to mention your poll is 12 years old.

    I argue that California has the most millionaires and billionaires per capita with Hollywood and Silicon Valley. And they are overwhelmingly liberal. The other mecca of wealth is the north-east coast, another overwhelmingly liberal area.



    Democrats now represent 65% of taxpayers with a household income of $500,000 or more, according to pre-pandemic Internal Revenue Service statistics.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...00-plus-voters


    Last edited by Sparko; 12-11-2023, 12:00 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
      From whence do you imagine sperm banks get their sperm?
      Why? Do you not know?
      "It ain't necessarily so
      The things that you're liable
      To read in the Bible
      It ain't necessarily so
      ."

      Sportin' Life
      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post

        Depends on how you define "wealthy" - moving that line allows you to come up with whatever poll results you want.

        I argue that California has the most millionaires and billionaires per capita with Hollywood and Silicon Valley. And they are overwhelmingly liberal. The other mecca of wealth is the north-east coast, another overwhelmingly liberal area.
        That's really arguing statistics with vaguity. If the claim is that most wealthy people are liberal and the statistics seem to show otherwise, then we ought to classify what constitutes as "rich" (Top 1%? Top 5%? Top 10%?) and then hunt down an ideological crosstab.

        Plenty of really, obscenely rich people in Texas, Louisiana, all over.

        -Sam
        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by seer View Post

          Because it is being thrown in our faces, constantly...Society would be much off if you all went back into the closet....
          Then people like you would have one thing less to encourage you to, idiomatically, get on your high horse and condemn. Just think how boring your perfect society would be. You would have nothing at all to to complain about! What would you find to do with yourself all day?

          Originally posted by seer View Post
          Of course not, at that point you don't want to break the mother child bond.
          You have just written:

          Because statistically children who come from fatherless homes do much worse, across the board.


          Therefore, according to you, those children will be in that category.
          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

            That you have no qualms using men as a means to your own selfish ends does not indicate I have not heard about of repositories for ova or spermatozoa (since you seem to want to be technical).
            That you could write what you did suggests you were entirely ignorant of sperm and ova banks and the benefits those donors offer to couples who, for a variety of reasons, cannot produce children between them. Your condemnation extends to anonymous sperm donors or ova donors giving infertile couples the chance to have a child that is at least half biologically their own.

            "It ain't necessarily so
            The things that you're liable
            To read in the Bible
            It ain't necessarily so
            ."

            Sportin' Life
            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
              Then people like you would have one thing less to encourage you to, idiomatically, get on your high horse and condemn. Just think how boring your perfect society would be. You would have nothing at all to to complain about! What would you find to do with yourself all day?
              You mean a society where more souls are saved from damnation?

              You have just written:

              Because statistically children who come from fatherless homes do much worse, across the board.


              Therefore, according to you, those children will be in that category.
              Yes they are in that category but that is no reason to take those children from the mother. And foster care may be way worse, so may adoptive parents...

              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by seer View Post

                You mean a society where more souls are saved from damnation?


                Originally posted by seer View Post

                Yes they are in that category but that is no reason to take those children from the mother.
                Why not? According to what you have written:

                children need fathers.


                Originally posted by seer View Post
                And foster care may be way worse, so may adoptive parents...
                Why? Adoption would have the benefit of providing two parents which is what you consider to be a necessary requirement for children.

                As you stated here

                they need both mothers and fathers


                So to raise children according to your notions it would be far better to remove her children from that widow and place them with adoptive parents thereby providing them with both a mother and a father .
                "It ain't necessarily so
                The things that you're liable
                To read in the Bible
                It ain't necessarily so
                ."

                Sportin' Life
                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                  ....
                  Why? Adoption would have the benefit of providing two parents which is what you consider to be a necessary requirement for children....
                  A minor technicality, if I may.... adoption (at least in the US) does not require two parents.

                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                    That you could write what you did suggests you were entirely ignorant of [spermatozoa] and ova banks
                    In no way did it suggest that. ETA: If you're going to be pretentious enough to use "ova", at least be similarly pretentious enough and use "spermatozoa" otherwise you're being pretentious and (lazy or misandrist, take your pick). smh

                    and the benefits those donors offer to couples who, for a variety of reasons, cannot produce children between them. Your condemnation extends to anonymous sperm donors or ova donors giving infertile couples the chance to have a child that is at least half biologically their own.
                    Adoption exists. I agree people of any sexual orientation can want a child that is at least half biologically their own but that does not make it any less exploitive. Surrogacy is also quite exploitive.
                    Last edited by Diogenes; 12-11-2023, 02:01 PM.
                    P1) If , then I win.

                    P2)

                    C) I win.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


                      Why not? According to what you have written:

                      children need fathers.


                      Why? Adoption would have the benefit of providing two parents which is what you consider to be a necessary requirement for children.

                      As you stated here

                      they need both mothers and fathers


                      So to raise children according to your notions it would be far better to remove her children from that widow and place them with adoptive parents thereby providing them with both a mother and a father .
                      That is a lie, blood is always better than non-blood. But the best is always two biological parents as the studies I linked in the past show. I have no reason to believe that adoptive parents would have the same degree of interest or concern or love that one biological does.Of course none of this justifies your self centered, a-moral choice in raising three boys without their fathers. All to pretend to have a normal family. You were play acting...
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by seer View Post
                        That is a lie, blood is always better than non-blood. But the best is always two biological parents as the studies I linked in the past show. I have no reason to believe that adoptive parents would have the same degree of interest or concern or love that one biological does.Of course none of this justifies your self centered, a-moral choice in raising three boys without their fathers. All to pretend to have a normal family. You were play acting...
                        I think you're getting a little carried away, brother. If the birth parents physically and/or sexually abuse the child and keep him in bodily danger, they are clearly NOT better than adoptive parents. Could adoptive parents ALSO be bad for the child? Absolutely. That's why the process has to be so carefully handled.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by seer View Post

                          That is a lie, blood is always better than non-blood. But the best is always two biological parents as the studies I linked in the past show. I have no reason to believe that adoptive parents would have the same degree of interest or concern or love that one biological does.Of course none of this justifies your self centered, a-moral choice in raising three boys without their fathers. All to pretend to have a normal family. You were play acting...
                          The two biological parents are generally best, but there are exceptions; I know of many biological parents who have no business raising a child.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                            I think you're getting a little carried away, brother. If the birth parents physically and/or sexually abuse the child and keep him in bodily danger, they are clearly NOT better than adoptive parents. Could adoptive parents ALSO be bad for the child? Absolutely. That's why the process has to be so carefully handled.
                            The studies I listed makes it clear, overall, by great margins, biological parents do better at every level.
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by seer View Post

                              The studies I listed makes it clear, overall, by great margins, biological parents do better at every level.
                              Which is not the same as....

                              Originally posted by seer View Post
                              ...blood is always better than non-blood....
                              There clearly are legitimate exceptions.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                                Which is not the same as....

                                There clearly are legitimate exceptions.
                                correct, I should have said almost always...
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 12:51 PM
                                8 responses
                                59 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post oxmixmudd  
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:29 AM
                                6 responses
                                77 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:13 AM
                                0 responses
                                15 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by seer, 02-20-2024, 06:18 PM
                                12 responses
                                94 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Diogenes  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 02-20-2024, 02:55 PM
                                12 responses
                                92 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post oxmixmudd  
                                Working...
                                X