On Single-Parent vs "Nuclear" Family

 

Quote:

 

Except you're assuming that a single parent family doesn't have a reliable job that can cover maybe 1-4 people. It's not like all single parents work behind the register at a fast food joint.

It would seem, though, that the VAST majority of single-parent families can't adequately cover much more than the necessities. It wouldn't surprise me if there were some single lawyers or doctors with a child that are able to provide the best in the world for the child...but it seems pretty clear to me that this isn't the case at all, and regardless of how you might have avoided mentioning it thus far, it's clear and obvious that the vast majority of "nuclear families" are better off socioeconomically than single-parent households simply because both parents bring in money from jobs. (aside: Can someone tell me where the term "nuclear family" comes from? I've heard it but never understood its origin.)

On Morality's Hindrance

 

Quote:

 

Okay, and if Galileo didn't push his theory because of the morals and the individuals who dissected cadavers did the same, where would we be? If those morals weren't in place more people would openly do research and more people could've put more money into both and advance our technology.

It's undeniable that the morality of the past has hindered scientific progress. However, to state that because the monolithic religions of the past restricted progress that the same will happen today is not accurate. Religion, by and large, has interfered with scientific progress...once, that I can remember, in the past few years on a national scale? It *has* interfered a little, yes, but not to the extent that humanity is aeons behind its potential, not today.