I am fascinated by the political ideology expressed here and what this signals about the currents in evangelicalism. Is it the role of government to force companies to have leave policies? Or should workers only work at companies that do have such policies?
https://twitter.com/Tish_H_Warren/status/1458102831353896969
Also interesting: the sociology of these policies. When children were born adjacent to grandparents, the policies weren't needed as much. When extended family networks disintegrated in a careerist culture, gov't policies were proposed to replace what family networks used to do.
There's incredibly good data on this: the key person who contributes to infant thriving is grandmothers. When you chose not live near grandmothers, there are more demands for family leave. I find this sociology fascinating. No grandmothers, no society. smithsonianmag.com/science-nature…
Personally, I'm ambivalent on the issue. I'm not sure it should be gov't coerced with penalty of fines, which gives the power to gov't to throw people in jail. But if company X wants to have a family leave policy, it should be how ever long they want.
Ultimately, this is a discussion about the proper role of government. Of course family leave policies are a great idea, the why question is who should drive the implementation, enforcement, etc. Are there good reasons a politician might vote against such a policy? Thoughts?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
