[Drumlin]

You aren't looking this from a bigger picture. The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process.

It doesn't really matter how much welfare costs (obviously it should kept under control like military, health and education) and that's why I didn't mention that aspect. All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.

[Arizhel]

>The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process.

Huh? Marriage itself is a legal construct by the state, no different than a corporation. Is a corporation a "basic building block for society" too? Should it be? What makes you think marriage is such a great thing that society should be dependent upon it? Statistics show that it's a massive gamble, and you're more likely to lose with it than you are to benefit. On top of that, the risks are enormous: child support, alimony, and in many cases, bankruptcy.

>All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.

That's funny, coming from someone who obviously supports marriage, which is absolutely an example of the state nannying people and becoming involved in an individual's life. Try going through a contested divorce and tell me the state wasn't involved.

The simple fact is that your "standard familes" are a complete and utter failure. Society needs an all-new paradigm, because clinging to this archaic institution clearly isn't working.