> In the US, the trend leaders when it comes to having kids out of wedlock are the poorest parts of the population, mostly blacks, where "unmarried" and "unpartnered" tend to go hand-in-hand.
I know you’re talking about “trend leaders”. But you must have forgotten about Native Americans and Latinos. Native Americans and black people tend to have children out of wedlock at about the same rate. Latinos have children out of wedlock at a high but lower rate. But there are more Latinos in the United States than there are black people, so there’s actually more Latino children born out of wedlock. And Latinos have the highest birth rate too.
Same goes for white people in the United States. If the rate for black people is about 70% and the rate for white people is about 30%, there are still hundreds of thousands more white children born out of wedlock than black children each year in the United States.
(Sorry, the whole “trend leader” thing rubs me the wrong. It’s like when people talk about welfare recipients based on race. Someone always says “X percentage of black people are on welfare, tsk.” But then when you look at the numbers, Native Americans have the higher percentage within their own race. But again, most welfare recipients are white so there are literally hundreds of thousands more white people on welfare than black people lol. Why doesn’t that fact get a “tsk”?)
Someone replied to you saying/asking “aren’t black people religious”. Your “mostly black” comment limited the discussion. Imagine if you had said “mostly Latinos” instead. There could have been a discussion about Catholicism. There could have been something more, something else at least.