I think the alleged problems are overblown. Some contaminated radioactive waste is inevitable, but I can't shake the suspicion that expended fuel rods are being wasted when they could be reinriched. Admittedly, I am not a nuclear physicist.
I'd agree that long-term storage probably is a moral issue, about people in 5000 years, rather than a materialist one. But a lot of people will have problems with nuclear power used by man kind in the first place. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Fukushima and Chernobyl all were a thing.
Nuclear power and nuclear weapons are not necessarily intertwined. Fukushima was an old design in a tsunami zone. Chernobyl was an even older Soviet design operated outside its design parameters. Nuclear power is still exponentially safer than anything else.
Poor design isn't really a justification. Even the best system can fail. The problem is that with other sources of power like solar, wind, water, gas, you have a moderate constant risk. Nuclear disasters happen unexpectedly and with massive destruction nobody was able to predict.
Let me make an analogy:
Airplanes are one of the safest mass transit systems we have, but if we only focus on the sensationalized news of tragic crashes, they feel more dangerous.
It's not really an argument against air travel to point at 9/11, TWA flight 800, MH370, etc.
LOL! The one who has dedicated his entire account to spam wants to be left alone? You have been told over and over again to just stop being an ass. Your rep is a consequence of your behavior.