Would you like to know more?
Except that the bill does nothing of the kind. This is obvious to anyone reading the plain English of the bill, which merely suggests that the state's Child Abuse/Neglect Prevention Board mention that the incidence of child abuse is higher in single-parent homes. Having been a single parent myself, I can understand the logic there, and there probably are statistics to support that. Being a parent is stressful enough when there are two of you to work on it, and the stress jumps exponentially when one of the parents isn't there. So you'd think this would be a good thing, right?
No, apparently not; the article quotes some female Democrat state senator who apparently has divined the Secret Dog Whistle Code Language Grothman snuck into the bill to mean that he wants all the
Single parenting is a growing problem in this country. The current mix of pop culture and government subsidies isn't helping, and neither is the attitude that "teenagers can't help themselves" that's so prevalent. God help you if you suggest going back to the social climate that discouraged pregnancy outside of marriage, that looked down on "no-fault divorce", and didn't tell men they had no say in whether their woman would give birth to their child - but if the child did come into the world, they also have no say in whether they're going to support it. You're some kind of Neanderthal who wants to "restrict womens' choices". Bill James once wrote, in one of the essays that came before his explication of the Plexiglass Principle, that it was a lot easier to destroy things than it was to build them up. That certainly seems true of societies, just as it is of sports teams.
I could go on at greater length, but I'm already pissed off by people jumping to conclusions and being knee-jerking idiots, a condition probably not helped by being tired.