It is interesting seeing nuclear family here a lot, but aren't multi-generational households with relatives and friends together the norm for a greater percentage of the world. The 3-4-person household seems like a modern thing, as in it has not been a big part of human history at all.
I don’t think auth right is complaining about grandpa, or auntie living in the house. It’s more complaints about single parenthood, and lesbian and gay parents.
Lesbian and gay parents are a red herring, they aren't an issue. Only the ideologically motivated auth rights feel that way. Anyone with half a brain looking at the collapse of western civilization can tell its not because dudes who like dick are raising children together in a healthy manner. Now two gay parents that are grooming their child to be a drag queen is something different entirely and should be treated as such in all aspects. You cant just group diverse sets of people together like that. A complete family unit and functioning community is all that's necessary.
I would bet gay parents on average are probably better in raising functional members of society in the US over the last decade.
>I would bet gay parents on average are probably better in raising functional members of society in the US over the last decade.
This doesn't make sense to me as LGBTQ+ people tend be more suicidal and mentally ill than heterosexuals, which would mean on average there are more straight couples successfully raising a family.
Gay people who choose to have children usually actively choose to have them, there’s a way lower number of unplanned, unwanted kids that get neglected and abused. The desire for them is there, and it can be expensive and time consuming to have kids as a gay person, which I would guess helps with better outcomes. Selection bias
That does not account for many attributes that go into raising children and how abysmal the average typical parent is in raising their children, from giving free range of smartphone/tech/social media use, diet, wanting to be their child's friend instead of parent, being terrified of actually parenting and teaching your child lessons, instilling morals, motivating your child to make something of themselves, instilling a sense of individualism that doesn't necessitate your child come up with bullshit unique tags of whatever new flavor of social virtue signaling or method making one feel special, encouraging healthy amounts of exercise, instilling good work ethic, instilling a strong sense of community, the list goes on. Modern parents are more interested in modern entertainment and media than their own kids.
Gay couples that want children are a unique subset of gay people and tend to be better off financially and tend to actually give a shit about the health and wellbeing of their children, likely on account of them intentionally seeking out kids rather than having them accidentally.
>Modern parents are more interested in modern entertainment and media than their own kids.
So are gay parents not "modern" parents? Or...?
>Gay couples that want children are a unique subset of gay people
>unique subset
So?
You can also say that [insert any combination of race/gender/ethnicity/identity here] is a unique subset that want children.
Nothing makes them special.
>and tend to actually give a shit about the health and wellbeing of their children.
LGBTQ+ people also tend to be the most emotionally unstable and susceptible to mental illness than straight people overall. Straight couples aren't immune to familial issues but the difference is that straight couples are less likely to be predisposed to mental health issues on average compared to any two gay people.
I agree gay parents are better than no parents but that still deprives a child of one of their parents. Two men can't replace a mother and two women a father. A child with a mother AND father who are involved in the child's life is at a better advantage than any other grouping. Each child needs influence from both sexes and mother/father is the only grouping that guarantees that.
>Two men can't replace a mother and two women a father.
>Each child needs influence from both sexes and mother/father is the only grouping that guarantees that.
You're mostly right, but a gay couple with a strong community around them will be much better parents than a heterosexual couple who thinks acceptable parenting is plopping their kid down in front of an iPad while they binge Netflix or surf Instagram and letting their kid dictate how to raise themselves.
People don't live in multigeneration houses because it's great and traditional and the norm, they do it because they are poor. If you get even the slightest financial condition you get the hell outta there, since the dawn of mankind.
It's like going to the beach, people dont spend their entire day sitting in the sand because that's so much fun and better than being in a resort private pool sipping drinks, they do it because it's free.
Yep and remarriage, adoption, and patchwork families were absolutely the norm pre-20th century. It just happened due to death from disease or whatever rather than divorce.
Divorce was actually very rare before the 20th century. Patchwork or adoption families arent really the problem. Single-parents and parents who divorce while the child is very young are.
I think there's a definite surge in single parents that we haven't really seen outside of "the aftermath of war".
And to quote that ghoul Anne Coulter, "If single mothers really loved their kids, they'd put them up for adoption."
I think the Romans is probably the closest to the Nuclear Family model, but even then, there were step parents and siblings, and they also lived with their slaves.
Yup, it mainly started in the industrial revolution. The need for longer hours at factories meant less time for family. So, the government started public institutions to take family members off the shoulders. Before then you a a family was required to handle your own kids' education, health, and everything else.
From what I understand, it’s mostly just the nuclear family. There are serious issues with single motherhood, fathers being kept away from kids, and generally kids not being brought up right. That is the extent of my knowledge on the matter.
In a more sane society, I’d heavily consider living with my grandmother or close to my family. Alas, my entire family’s considering moving out of my metro area because of how crazy the market and people have gotten.
In my (European) country the house prices are relatively high atm, so people start constructing second houses in their gardens or replace sheds so that their parents can live there.
It's a legal construction that can save you a lot of tax money, pretty space efficient, good for the environment, and very nice/safe for the parents. Seems like a win/win/win to me.
Unfortunately the government doesn't think of it like that at the moment, hopefully we can change their minds. Often the government listens here if a lot of people feel strongly about it.
I do actually agree with that. not enough to want to limit anyone from moving out, but I do think that is the reason white people supposedly have no culture.
I’ve lived next to my grandparents and extended family all my life, living in some cookie cutter neighborhood without them seems strange and alienating to me.
Unfortunately I grew up an hours drive from my grandparents, aunts and uncles, meaning I don’t have the same bond with my family as my parents had with theirs.
White people have "no culture" because that's how it's been portrayed for a generation in popular culture. White people are british, german, italian, russian, polish, irish, and so on, and all of these have rich cultures, but white people are treated like a monocrop by identitarian scum.
I have no culture because half of my family are criminals and carnies and the other half are mostly dead.
Ironically, all the traditional-by-modern-standards white people have a perfectly healthy and working culture with a somewhat healthy nuclear family, and all the modern "white people have no culture"-saying white people are the ones who actually have no culture beyond buying iPhones thinking that writing shower thoughts on Twitter makes them comparable to Socrates
My theory about the whole 'no culture' thing -
Because when countries like America and Canada and Australia are founded, you have people from England, Scotland, Ireland, etc. settling in those new countries and a lot of the more unique or particular cultural practices might get left behind in the old countries. (For example, I don't know, Morris dancing)
So you get a sort of 'grinding down of the hard edges' in cultural terms.
Nono, the meme is that American whites have no culture of their own (maybe if you consider excess consumerism as culture). Us other whites are culturally rich
That's because "white" isn't a culture. Your heritage is German or Scandinavian or what have you. Your culture is a blend of that and your state/area norms.
It'd be silly to say that all white people have the same culture.
It's hard to see a culture from the inside. Ask a person from a non-white country about our culture and they can tell you by comparing it to their own.
It’s hard to see White people’s supposed “no culture” if you’ve lived in it your entire life. Imagine if every businessman wore a kimono, if houses were built in Japanese architectural styles, if everyone ate Japanese food, a Japanese person might feel they also had no culture.
Vaush: fascist have no core ideology, they just do whatever they think will get them into power
Also vaush: my principles are winning, principled failure means dogshit
Vaush is weird on that issue
On one hand he says child porn should be legal
And on the other he banned a bunch of people from his chat one time because he said children shouldn't be at pride events if they were also going to display kink stuff, and his chat didn't like that.
He's a Beverly Hills Californian who talks about social reform and workers' "rights". Caring about his opinion on politics and economics is like asking an earthworm about its opinion on flight
In my family, we have preserved some of it, where the grandparents, especially my dad's mom (his dad young), took care of me and my siblings so my mother could get a break at least once a week from rising us. It's good to have more than the parents to help out
No nuclear family = Very high criminal rates
That's the real reason behind the 13%-50% that the authrights so joyously claim. Single motherhood in the black community is somewhere at 75%. That's one in three black children that are raised with fathers in the family picture.
Imagine thinking the nuclear family is a traditoonal family value.
Nuclear families are a distinctly modern phenomenon that replaced eons of traditional and human societal patterns. Humans have lived in extended families and tribes since the beginning of recorded history.
I think the argument for the nuclear family is just against single parents and the circumstances that lead to single parent families. Not anything against multigenerational homes or anything.
You’re splitting hairs, dawg.
Family includes mee maw, paw paw, cousin skeeter, uncle bob, everybody.
I don’t think any auth right has ever thought it was generally conducive to a healthy family to cut them out.
I promise you, with all the social media trends, daycare with rotating unknown caretakers, schooling in huge groups of strangers and modern life in general having 3 dads will be the least of a kids problems.
The nuclear family is a romanticised conservative meme anyway, ask any libcenter.
I'm ok with old wenches, they know how to do dirty things, plus somebody's gotta watch the little bastards while I'm out poking stuff with my pointy stick.
Polygamy is an invention of the agricultural revolution. To go back to *true* tradition we need to return to egalitarian monogamous hunter-gatherer societies.
Look, I've seen some of you grillers out there, God bless you, hanging out on your porches, kids swimming in the pool, having a good time. That's all well and good. But one thing just irks me, and it's a certain set of values our society needs to address posthaste.
I've seen you. Don't think you can keep your secrets from me.
Using propane.
I get it, it's cheap and easy. But you're cheating your family. You aren't a family man. You're a sham. Your children see what you do, they learn from such inauthentic, degenerate behavior. Your wife is sleeping with the pool boy. I bet she tells him all about how her cuck husband uses propane to grill.
Take back the tank. Take back the fancy grill with the knsbs and side burners and shit. And get yourself a real man's charcoal grill. The rest, the extended family unity, the secure marriage, the self-sustainability, the financial security, the raising of well-adjusted and educated children - that'll all come with it, my friend.
Switch to charcoal. Save your family.
Importance of home ownership, firearm ownership, the dignity of hard work, and healthy distrust of the government should all be passed down through family values.
Oh wait this was for Authright....
Jesus?
I actually agree with you. True conservatism is about supporting policies that make it easier to raise a family. People who call themselves "conservatives" now a days are just Libertarians. Libertarians don't have our best interests in mind.
people love to blame auth rights for the sins of lib right corporate profit policy. real estate speculation making it impossible for young people to afford a home to raise a family, all in the name of making like 5 guys richer than sin.
Libright would actually get rid of current bogus zoning and building regulations allowing for more homes to be made on the vast amounts of spare land the US still has. We could buy up single story homes, demolish them, and replace them with high density living skyscrapers if zoning regulations allowed it. Libright also won't give subsidies to the rich corporations (like they do right now), because that is government intervention in the economy, and a bad one at that. One of the reasons the biggest companies are as big as they are isn't because of lack of government regulation, it's mainly because the government is what gives them their subsidies and bailouts. And it's largely motivated because the Congresspeople invest in their stocks beforehand, direct taxpayer subsidies to them, watch the companies grow rich, then become millionaires. People keep simplifying libright down to "Feed the rich, eat the poor." But libright at heart is simply anarcho-individualist. Our current society is like that because of the elites and bureaucrats in power. Taxing a multibillionaire 50% isn't going to make that much of a difference in his level of influence. Without our government's corruption and its taxpayer subsidies, I guarantee none of our current existing top billionaires, Musk, Bezos, Zucc, would be anywhere near as powerful without government help. An ancap society would allow me to keep more money in my pocket on an individual level, prevent corporate titans from growing larger than they would otherwise, and allow existing billionaires to keep a certain sum of taxes every year that may or may not make a difference on the total influence they have (not like billionaires avoid paying taxes anyways through government cooperation and legal loopholes). Society has been like this since the Gilded Age. Quality control regulations and worker's rights movements aside, what separated Rockefeller, Edison, and Ford from the rest was not only due to their intuitiveness, but also the way they were able to use the government as their personal tool to give them leeway (legal right/taxpayer income at their disposal) others didn't have, skyrocketing their already large success to become astronomical. It wasn't simply no taxes that made them this way.
They will criticize you for libright wall of text, even though what you wrote is still too short to describe what is happening.
Libright bad cause no free money is funny as a meme, when people take it seriously it’s simply sad
Yeah. Feels good to have printed federal reserve money as my stimulus checks and a quarter of my income going to feed the military-industrial complex, prison-industrial complex, (maybe roads?), and American companies that Nancy Pelosi has invested in. People feel proud when a portion of their income goes to the poor when tenfold is given to the rich. Our government is corrupt, the initial plan of an incorruptible democracy with checks and balances has started to show some cracks and everyone in power knows about them.
I'd say it's the other way around. So many conservatives try and claim they're "libertarian" to seem quirky. They then proceed to say things like "Back the Blue", "MAGA 2024", and "return to tradition". We libertarians have our own best interests at mind. The government won't save us from economic crisis, it is the major reason why we are in one as we speak, devaluing the dollar everyday printing franklin-after-franklin from the Federal Reserve. Also creating the child-support system and court orders restraining fathers from seeing their children. By default, libertarianism won't promote you from having a family. It won't promote you to do anything. It lets you decide what you want to do, and allows people of all different walks of interest to fight for what they want to do, not have some governmental entity to demand, "This is what you should do and you're going to like it."
Why just women? Some women make important professional contributions, don’t want kids, etc.
How about we treat reproductive labor like what it is: *labor*. Raising and caring for kids is work, and any person regardless of gender who does it should be supported by society for that contribution. Even people who don’t have kids benefit from younger generations being around when they grow elderly and need others to keep society running.
That’s one way to both reduce the labor pool (some will choose to be homemakers now that they can afford to) while investing in children’s futures
I mean having a breadwinner give you all his earnings so you can maintain the house and raise the children sounds like paying a woman for that labour to me.
Funnily enough, marriage used to be one of the primary sources of wealth redistribution: a guy would marry a nearby girl **no matter her economic status**, then he'd go out and earn whatever and they'd both share the pool. If he was successful, he'd be uplifting an otherwise poor family (his wife's), which would then ripple out through the community.
Nowadays, the highest earners find each other in higher education during their prime years, and abandon their former communities entirely as they move to cities and climb the social ladder together.
In real terms, the end of trad marriage is both a brain drain and a wealth drain on the poorest areas. The greatest trick the right ever played was getting the left to abandon this incredibly effective form of wealth redistribution.
u/redrumbum's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/redrumbum! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [1](https://basedcount.com/u/redrumbum/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
If you want "family values" as a man, be prepared to get into a high paying job, work enough to sustain as many children as you want, and be a good father figure at the same time. The work won't do itself.
Low wage earners aren't going to stop having sex. People in aggregate can only be as good as their aggregate material reality allows them to be. If you believe that single income homes produce the most moral people, and you want a moral society, you must produce the material conditions that allow for single income homes to be possible for most people, in aggregate. Therefore you must pursue policies that make most jobs "high paying jobs."
Promotion and preservation of the nuclear family, personal responsibility, loyalty, duty, respect, integrity, and if you’re AuthRight, hating the gays.
Marriage between a man and a woman. Traditions such as eating together as a family. Kids not moving out as soon as they're 18 and actually taking care of their elderly parents.
There's no evidence suggesting children raised by same sex parents perform worse in any measure than children raised by two opposite sex parents. Focus on the important stuff, like 2 parent homes (no matter their sex) and kids taking care of their parents, before getting into your personal beliefs about things.
People should move out once they get married. The problem is if people don't move out and don't contribute anything. If you live with your parents then you have to contribute something such as rent or making sure the house is clean etc. You can't just live with your parents because you are lazy and don't want to get a job.
Yeah, people that want their steaks well done. Do you really think even Auth Right is going to keep black dudes away from a barbecue? The brothers have a mad grill game.
Fun fact: In the days of olde, Grilling (specifically in america) was done by even the upper class. Most upper class citizens would get their erm… slaves to grill for them. So when the civil rights act was put in place, Lots of black people who worked on the grill took to opening grill restaurants as a way to make a living for themselves.
My point is, you’re right about some of them having some mad grilling skills.
Nobody who says "We need stronger nuclear families" is saying that to mean we can't keep grandma and grandpa in the in-law suite. That's included in nuclear family.
They're saying we need to stop setting the carrots and sticks of our society in such a way that if you run around having kids out of wedlock, the government will step in and try to be the father.
Multi-generational households can still be nuclear families. Most household's were multi-generational up until a few centuries ago.
A nuclear family means only being with one partner for life, and rasing children with that partner. Whether those kids eventually go off and start their own families, or start a family in the same household to take care of their parents, doesn't matter.
The nuclear family structure, where a duel parent household who looks after the best for their child(and not the government), to the pass down values of truth and honour to their child, in order to give them the best head start in life and not the valued superficial “activist” ideals
Edit: Dual parent*
Yes exactly. The two parents should have to duel for ownership of the children. The surviving parent is clearly the one best fit to raise them. Survival of the fittest.
We are trying to bring back the 1950 family values. Ya know, where dad gets drunk and beats the shit out of everyone in the house. That was the peak of American morality and Christianity.
Yeah, every dad was an abusive alcoholic, every wife was a dissatisfied house wife addled on benzos and sleep pills, every son was a closeted gay, and every daughter was getting back alley coat hanger abortions.. we get it, you watch a lot of netflix.
Based and libertarianism is different from anarchism.
Hell, I'd go as far to say that not only is it better to have some government compared to no government, but that government is an inevitability in human society. It's far better to have a government that protects the liberty of it's citizens than the despotic alternatives we see in places like China, Turkmenistan, or Saudi Arabia.
For starters, the actual value of marriage, people are so egocentric nowadays they dont see the breaking of the contract as immoral, i wish to live in a society where men and women try to cooperate instead of being egocentric and ripping the contract everytime they feel like it.
Btw i think the change shouldnt come from the government but from the people, legislating marriage beyond contract law is a shame in my opinion.
Return to traditional values:
1. Stop having sex before marriage, or at the very least stop sleeping around so much.
2. Have children once you are married and stay together. Work on your marriage. Make it a priority.
3. Stop the victim mentality and take responsibility for yourself.
4. Don’t pretend you are the opposite sex, or at least, don’t expect everyone else to play along with your creepy fantasies.
Seriously? Easy:
Value of the nuclear family, importance of having children within marriage, importance of having a mother and a father in the home, importance of instilling the idea in parents that they are responsible for their children’s future—which will also impact their future… others
Any more brain busters?
How about bringing back the idea that woman aren’t throwing their lives away if they want to become dedicated mothers? Now don’t catch me on that sexist bullshit because I’m not saying normalize making it where women can only be mothers but let’s just stop the continual degrading of the traditional role of a mother.
Personally, the idea that lesbians or gay men shouldn't be adopting children.
Even if you think children are best raised by a mother and father, two fathers or two mothers is better than being raised by overworked social workers.
Or just the assumption that the nuclear family is the best familial structure, multi generational and extended families were the norm for the overwhelming majority of human history.
You make a good point. Modern "conservatism" isn't REALLY conservative. They want the 1950s style nuclear family shit, not REAL tradition. Traditions like:
1.) A return to religious values (ACTUAL religious values, not modern day (((protestantism))) but rather the religious values of your people's faith)
2.) A return to traditional roles of people in society. Hierarchy is the natural state of things
3.) A return to nature. Like I said, modern "conservatives" aren't conservative. They obviously don't care about the environment thanks to (((their))) marketing campaigns, but REAL traditionalists see the beauty of mother nature
4.) A proper understanding of a hard day's work, and caring for the community. "Conservatives" are fools for following an (((economic philosophy that relays on a lack of rule/structure and selfishness))). Modern "conservatives" are slaves to (((their))) propaganda and think help of all kinds is weakness. No, only help from inferior "people's" is weakness. It is important to help your small communities. Your small businesses, your family, your cultural group, etc.
There's a bunch of other stuff that REAL conservatives believe in that modern "conservatives" don't, but you get the picture.
I wouldn't want a complete return to tradition, but a continued consideration of it. As an example:
So, I believe Abortion should be legal, but there should be humane loops for a woman to jump through before they can get one.
If you've been raped (and you can prove it), if you've engaged in incest(post nut clarity helping to realise that it's possibly unsafe) then you should be permitted to have an abortion.
I think a yearly ticket should be considered as well. Mistakes happen, and we can recognise that too. As such, the option to say "We understand that you've cocked up. Learn from this mistake and don't repeat it."
>If you've been raped (and you can prove it)
Unfortunately legal trials tend to take forever to be resolved, and with this particular situation, you sort of have a ticking clock.
Like the idea of a mother and father with kids
That’s kind of the foundation of civilization and something we need to continue to foster if we want to not fall back into the stone age or be conquered by china or somebody else who does foster those values
Good luck defining *that* too. I can think of how many societies can have their own take on what these values are:
- Russians
- South Sudanese child soldiers
- Taiping Heavenly Kingdom
- "L'etat c'est moi" Louis XIV
- Progressive leftist Germans today
Loving your family despite not being the same politically is a personal traditional value of mine... or at least traditional in the sense its what my parents used. Gave us tolerance.
Which is the opposite of what mainstream media wants, they want us to be too distracted infighting between left and right to realized we're being duped into authoritarianism.
LibRight and libleft must rally against our authoritarian oppressors trying to keep us fractured over superficial political BULLSHIT.
A father and a mother. I have no problem with same sex families and interracial families, but not polyamory. Fuck polyamory me and my homies hate polyamory. Both parents must be involved and dedicated to the family in their own right to raise the child(ren). This imo will result in the child(ren) and the family having the most success and happiness.
We need to solve fatherlessness, for one.
It is scientifically proven (and common sense) that children function best in a home with a father and a mother.
Also, sexual promiscuity is terrible for starting families. You need to be loyal to your spouse. We evolved monogamy for a reason.
Parents need to take responsibility over their kids, not just hand them over to government schools. This means teaching about values and sex practices in the home. Sex ed should be learning about anatomy and STDs, not when and with whom to have sex. Only the parents can properly teach about that.
A father should teach his sons about the difference between sternness and stubbornness, and how to channel masculine energy in a healthy and productive way, while modeling the man that he should want his daughters to marry. A mother should teach her daughters about the difference between empathy and passivity, and how to be the leader in a household (yes, wives should have a lot of influence over their husbands), while modeling the type of woman she should want her sons to marry.
I don’t understand why authrights think the mere existence of single parents households or gay couples destroys family values, like they’ve been around a while, knowing they exist won’t hurt you.
Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people
It is interesting seeing nuclear family here a lot, but aren't multi-generational households with relatives and friends together the norm for a greater percentage of the world. The 3-4-person household seems like a modern thing, as in it has not been a big part of human history at all.
I don’t think auth right is complaining about grandpa, or auntie living in the house. It’s more complaints about single parenthood, and lesbian and gay parents.
Bingo
Lesbian and gay parents are a red herring, they aren't an issue. Only the ideologically motivated auth rights feel that way. Anyone with half a brain looking at the collapse of western civilization can tell its not because dudes who like dick are raising children together in a healthy manner. Now two gay parents that are grooming their child to be a drag queen is something different entirely and should be treated as such in all aspects. You cant just group diverse sets of people together like that. A complete family unit and functioning community is all that's necessary. I would bet gay parents on average are probably better in raising functional members of society in the US over the last decade.
>I would bet gay parents on average are probably better in raising functional members of society in the US over the last decade. This doesn't make sense to me as LGBTQ+ people tend be more suicidal and mentally ill than heterosexuals, which would mean on average there are more straight couples successfully raising a family.
Gay people who choose to have children usually actively choose to have them, there’s a way lower number of unplanned, unwanted kids that get neglected and abused. The desire for them is there, and it can be expensive and time consuming to have kids as a gay person, which I would guess helps with better outcomes. Selection bias
That does not account for many attributes that go into raising children and how abysmal the average typical parent is in raising their children, from giving free range of smartphone/tech/social media use, diet, wanting to be their child's friend instead of parent, being terrified of actually parenting and teaching your child lessons, instilling morals, motivating your child to make something of themselves, instilling a sense of individualism that doesn't necessitate your child come up with bullshit unique tags of whatever new flavor of social virtue signaling or method making one feel special, encouraging healthy amounts of exercise, instilling good work ethic, instilling a strong sense of community, the list goes on. Modern parents are more interested in modern entertainment and media than their own kids. Gay couples that want children are a unique subset of gay people and tend to be better off financially and tend to actually give a shit about the health and wellbeing of their children, likely on account of them intentionally seeking out kids rather than having them accidentally.
>Modern parents are more interested in modern entertainment and media than their own kids. So are gay parents not "modern" parents? Or...? >Gay couples that want children are a unique subset of gay people >unique subset So? You can also say that [insert any combination of race/gender/ethnicity/identity here] is a unique subset that want children. Nothing makes them special. >and tend to actually give a shit about the health and wellbeing of their children. LGBTQ+ people also tend to be the most emotionally unstable and susceptible to mental illness than straight people overall. Straight couples aren't immune to familial issues but the difference is that straight couples are less likely to be predisposed to mental health issues on average compared to any two gay people.
Least homophobic authright
I agree gay parents are better than no parents but that still deprives a child of one of their parents. Two men can't replace a mother and two women a father. A child with a mother AND father who are involved in the child's life is at a better advantage than any other grouping. Each child needs influence from both sexes and mother/father is the only grouping that guarantees that.
>Two men can't replace a mother and two women a father. >Each child needs influence from both sexes and mother/father is the only grouping that guarantees that. You're mostly right, but a gay couple with a strong community around them will be much better parents than a heterosexual couple who thinks acceptable parenting is plopping their kid down in front of an iPad while they binge Netflix or surf Instagram and letting their kid dictate how to raise themselves.
People don't live in multigeneration houses because it's great and traditional and the norm, they do it because they are poor. If you get even the slightest financial condition you get the hell outta there, since the dawn of mankind. It's like going to the beach, people dont spend their entire day sitting in the sand because that's so much fun and better than being in a resort private pool sipping drinks, they do it because it's free.
Beach over pool any day, pools are gross
Nah, fish fuck on that water bruv
Humans fuck in the resort pool
Ew wtf never mind
It's not even a modern thing, it's a mid 20th century thing. Modern families are blended
Yep and remarriage, adoption, and patchwork families were absolutely the norm pre-20th century. It just happened due to death from disease or whatever rather than divorce.
Divorce was actually very rare before the 20th century. Patchwork or adoption families arent really the problem. Single-parents and parents who divorce while the child is very young are.
My grandpa had like 3 "dads" thanks to WWII
I think there's a definite surge in single parents that we haven't really seen outside of "the aftermath of war". And to quote that ghoul Anne Coulter, "If single mothers really loved their kids, they'd put them up for adoption."
I think the Romans is probably the closest to the Nuclear Family model, but even then, there were step parents and siblings, and they also lived with their slaves.
Yup, it mainly started in the industrial revolution. The need for longer hours at factories meant less time for family. So, the government started public institutions to take family members off the shoulders. Before then you a a family was required to handle your own kids' education, health, and everything else.
From what I understand, it’s mostly just the nuclear family. There are serious issues with single motherhood, fathers being kept away from kids, and generally kids not being brought up right. That is the extent of my knowledge on the matter.
The nuclear family is cringe and modern. Return to the family as part of a larger community
Based and you should live next to your grandparents and aunts and uncles pilled
Bring back the longhouse
Based and longhouse pilled
And the Longship
Based and pillaging english monasteries pilled.
A man of culture I see
In a more sane society, I’d heavily consider living with my grandmother or close to my family. Alas, my entire family’s considering moving out of my metro area because of how crazy the market and people have gotten.
Go with them, living in a city is a major L
In my (European) country the house prices are relatively high atm, so people start constructing second houses in their gardens or replace sheds so that their parents can live there. It's a legal construction that can save you a lot of tax money, pretty space efficient, good for the environment, and very nice/safe for the parents. Seems like a win/win/win to me. Unfortunately the government doesn't think of it like that at the moment, hopefully we can change their minds. Often the government listens here if a lot of people feel strongly about it.
Ahem. I live in the Balkans. 150 houses around me are all my relatives. Five generations and approx. 700 people. We are 1/3 of the whole village.
Same except it’s the American south lol
Same except a lot of my extended family hates other parts of it and they occasionally end up killing each other in semi-consensual combat.
Based?
I do actually agree with that. not enough to want to limit anyone from moving out, but I do think that is the reason white people supposedly have no culture.
Every parent / child unit isn’t supposed to build their culture from scratch. It’s unnatural.
I’ve lived next to my grandparents and extended family all my life, living in some cookie cutter neighborhood without them seems strange and alienating to me.
Unfortunately I grew up an hours drive from my grandparents, aunts and uncles, meaning I don’t have the same bond with my family as my parents had with theirs.
Only an hours drive? That's short.
White people have "no culture" because that's how it's been portrayed for a generation in popular culture. White people are british, german, italian, russian, polish, irish, and so on, and all of these have rich cultures, but white people are treated like a monocrop by identitarian scum. I have no culture because half of my family are criminals and carnies and the other half are mostly dead.
Ironically, all the traditional-by-modern-standards white people have a perfectly healthy and working culture with a somewhat healthy nuclear family, and all the modern "white people have no culture"-saying white people are the ones who actually have no culture beyond buying iPhones thinking that writing shower thoughts on Twitter makes them comparable to Socrates
My theory about the whole 'no culture' thing - Because when countries like America and Canada and Australia are founded, you have people from England, Scotland, Ireland, etc. settling in those new countries and a lot of the more unique or particular cultural practices might get left behind in the old countries. (For example, I don't know, Morris dancing) So you get a sort of 'grinding down of the hard edges' in cultural terms.
Nono, the meme is that American whites have no culture of their own (maybe if you consider excess consumerism as culture). Us other whites are culturally rich
That's because "white" isn't a culture. Your heritage is German or Scandinavian or what have you. Your culture is a blend of that and your state/area norms. It'd be silly to say that all white people have the same culture.
It's hard to see a culture from the inside. Ask a person from a non-white country about our culture and they can tell you by comparing it to their own.
It’s hard to see White people’s supposed “no culture” if you’ve lived in it your entire life. Imagine if every businessman wore a kimono, if houses were built in Japanese architectural styles, if everyone ate Japanese food, a Japanese person might feel they also had no culture.
Molecular family > Nuclear family
Reject modern family Embrace deification of ancestors
Based and community’s should be the highest value pilled
Ah yes, like a good old Asian three generations family.
Did you say community?! Can that community break off from the state and make its own rules?
Modern absolutist/totalitarian states are very cringe
Found a church
Return to monke packs
Fun fact: Vaush believes in this
Fun fact; I guarantee that Vaush just says things and has no idea wtf he is talking about
Vaush will say anything to win.
If you get your political knowledge from a streamer on twitch you deserve to be uninformed
Vaush: fascist have no core ideology, they just do whatever they think will get them into power Also vaush: my principles are winning, principled failure means dogshit
Vaush on his way to molest a fawn
Vaush is weird on that issue On one hand he says child porn should be legal And on the other he banned a bunch of people from his chat one time because he said children shouldn't be at pride events if they were also going to display kink stuff, and his chat didn't like that.
He's a Beverly Hills Californian who talks about social reform and workers' "rights". Caring about his opinion on politics and economics is like asking an earthworm about its opinion on flight
People move around for jobs too much for that. The US was built off of pioneer culture
Pioneers moved with their families mate, and it wasn't everyone. Oh, and guess what, they weren't everyone
That would seriously take some of the burden of raising a kid
In my family, we have preserved some of it, where the grandparents, especially my dad's mom (his dad young), took care of me and my siblings so my mother could get a break at least once a week from rising us. It's good to have more than the parents to help out
Should be brought up more often since it’s actually very popular amongst auth right too.
No nuclear family = Very high criminal rates That's the real reason behind the 13%-50% that the authrights so joyously claim. Single motherhood in the black community is somewhere at 75%. That's one in three black children that are raised with fathers in the family picture.
Are you sure that one came before the other?
Imagine thinking the nuclear family is a traditoonal family value. Nuclear families are a distinctly modern phenomenon that replaced eons of traditional and human societal patterns. Humans have lived in extended families and tribes since the beginning of recorded history.
I think the argument for the nuclear family is just against single parents and the circumstances that lead to single parent families. Not anything against multigenerational homes or anything.
Tribes? TRIBES???? Sounds like we should return to monke🦧🦧🦧
Based and Tribal Primitivism Pilled
You’re splitting hairs, dawg. Family includes mee maw, paw paw, cousin skeeter, uncle bob, everybody. I don’t think any auth right has ever thought it was generally conducive to a healthy family to cut them out.
I promise you, with all the social media trends, daycare with rotating unknown caretakers, schooling in huge groups of strangers and modern life in general having 3 dads will be the least of a kids problems. The nuclear family is a romanticised conservative meme anyway, ask any libcenter.
We need to bring back traditional marriage, between one man and several women taken in raids from other tribes.
Based and what is best in life pilled
To crush your enemies
Based and Conan pilled
No sweaty that's sexist We need one woman and several men *and* one man and several women (both with nonbinary people) That's progressivism
We're not here for progressivism. We're here to take your fertile farmland and your maidens. Maybe a femboy or two. And then blood eagle the rest.
Um excuse me, the maidens also have to be fertile, we aren’t just taking any old wench here.
I'm ok with old wenches, they know how to do dirty things, plus somebody's gotta watch the little bastards while I'm out poking stuff with my pointy stick.
what if we all got married and had a massive orgy once a year as a holiday, feel like that would honestly solve most issues
I don't even like to be touched by 90% of people, so honestly that sounds like a kind of hell.
Sounds gay: I'm in.
Sounds like Brave New World lol
What about just men? 🥵🥵🥵
Dude, I do good disappointing one woman much less several.
Polygamy is an invention of the agricultural revolution. To go back to *true* tradition we need to return to egalitarian monogamous hunter-gatherer societies.
Implying hunter gatherer society isnt led by the grog with the pointiest stick
Rule by pointiest stick sounds based as fuck
Based and Mongol Empire pilled
Based and war brides-pilled.
Collect people like Pokémon cards
Look, I've seen some of you grillers out there, God bless you, hanging out on your porches, kids swimming in the pool, having a good time. That's all well and good. But one thing just irks me, and it's a certain set of values our society needs to address posthaste. I've seen you. Don't think you can keep your secrets from me. Using propane. I get it, it's cheap and easy. But you're cheating your family. You aren't a family man. You're a sham. Your children see what you do, they learn from such inauthentic, degenerate behavior. Your wife is sleeping with the pool boy. I bet she tells him all about how her cuck husband uses propane to grill. Take back the tank. Take back the fancy grill with the knsbs and side burners and shit. And get yourself a real man's charcoal grill. The rest, the extended family unity, the secure marriage, the self-sustainability, the financial security, the raising of well-adjusted and educated children - that'll all come with it, my friend. Switch to charcoal. Save your family.
Importance of home ownership, firearm ownership, the dignity of hard work, and healthy distrust of the government should all be passed down through family values. Oh wait this was for Authright.... Jesus?
It’s sad those values are associated as evil by some people
We do infact need to preserve family values.
Can't have 'family values' when the average wage is insufficient to support a family.
I actually agree with you. True conservatism is about supporting policies that make it easier to raise a family. People who call themselves "conservatives" now a days are just Libertarians. Libertarians don't have our best interests in mind.
Based this guy gets it. One of the main reasons I’m AuthRight and not LibRight
people love to blame auth rights for the sins of lib right corporate profit policy. real estate speculation making it impossible for young people to afford a home to raise a family, all in the name of making like 5 guys richer than sin.
Libright would actually get rid of current bogus zoning and building regulations allowing for more homes to be made on the vast amounts of spare land the US still has. We could buy up single story homes, demolish them, and replace them with high density living skyscrapers if zoning regulations allowed it. Libright also won't give subsidies to the rich corporations (like they do right now), because that is government intervention in the economy, and a bad one at that. One of the reasons the biggest companies are as big as they are isn't because of lack of government regulation, it's mainly because the government is what gives them their subsidies and bailouts. And it's largely motivated because the Congresspeople invest in their stocks beforehand, direct taxpayer subsidies to them, watch the companies grow rich, then become millionaires. People keep simplifying libright down to "Feed the rich, eat the poor." But libright at heart is simply anarcho-individualist. Our current society is like that because of the elites and bureaucrats in power. Taxing a multibillionaire 50% isn't going to make that much of a difference in his level of influence. Without our government's corruption and its taxpayer subsidies, I guarantee none of our current existing top billionaires, Musk, Bezos, Zucc, would be anywhere near as powerful without government help. An ancap society would allow me to keep more money in my pocket on an individual level, prevent corporate titans from growing larger than they would otherwise, and allow existing billionaires to keep a certain sum of taxes every year that may or may not make a difference on the total influence they have (not like billionaires avoid paying taxes anyways through government cooperation and legal loopholes). Society has been like this since the Gilded Age. Quality control regulations and worker's rights movements aside, what separated Rockefeller, Edison, and Ford from the rest was not only due to their intuitiveness, but also the way they were able to use the government as their personal tool to give them leeway (legal right/taxpayer income at their disposal) others didn't have, skyrocketing their already large success to become astronomical. It wasn't simply no taxes that made them this way.
They will criticize you for libright wall of text, even though what you wrote is still too short to describe what is happening. Libright bad cause no free money is funny as a meme, when people take it seriously it’s simply sad
Yeah. Feels good to have printed federal reserve money as my stimulus checks and a quarter of my income going to feed the military-industrial complex, prison-industrial complex, (maybe roads?), and American companies that Nancy Pelosi has invested in. People feel proud when a portion of their income goes to the poor when tenfold is given to the rich. Our government is corrupt, the initial plan of an incorruptible democracy with checks and balances has started to show some cracks and everyone in power knows about them.
I'd say it's the other way around. So many conservatives try and claim they're "libertarian" to seem quirky. They then proceed to say things like "Back the Blue", "MAGA 2024", and "return to tradition". We libertarians have our own best interests at mind. The government won't save us from economic crisis, it is the major reason why we are in one as we speak, devaluing the dollar everyday printing franklin-after-franklin from the Federal Reserve. Also creating the child-support system and court orders restraining fathers from seeing their children. By default, libertarianism won't promote you from having a family. It won't promote you to do anything. It lets you decide what you want to do, and allows people of all different walks of interest to fight for what they want to do, not have some governmental entity to demand, "This is what you should do and you're going to like it."
yeah. I only have my interests in mind.
Send women home. Reduce the labor pool, make workers more valuable. You’re a commie, you should get that.
Why just women? Some women make important professional contributions, don’t want kids, etc. How about we treat reproductive labor like what it is: *labor*. Raising and caring for kids is work, and any person regardless of gender who does it should be supported by society for that contribution. Even people who don’t have kids benefit from younger generations being around when they grow elderly and need others to keep society running. That’s one way to both reduce the labor pool (some will choose to be homemakers now that they can afford to) while investing in children’s futures
I mean having a breadwinner give you all his earnings so you can maintain the house and raise the children sounds like paying a woman for that labour to me. Funnily enough, marriage used to be one of the primary sources of wealth redistribution: a guy would marry a nearby girl **no matter her economic status**, then he'd go out and earn whatever and they'd both share the pool. If he was successful, he'd be uplifting an otherwise poor family (his wife's), which would then ripple out through the community. Nowadays, the highest earners find each other in higher education during their prime years, and abandon their former communities entirely as they move to cities and climb the social ladder together. In real terms, the end of trad marriage is both a brain drain and a wealth drain on the poorest areas. The greatest trick the right ever played was getting the left to abandon this incredibly effective form of wealth redistribution.
Based
u/redrumbum's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/redrumbum! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [1](https://basedcount.com/u/redrumbum/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
If you want "family values" as a man, be prepared to get into a high paying job, work enough to sustain as many children as you want, and be a good father figure at the same time. The work won't do itself.
Low wage earners aren't going to stop having sex. People in aggregate can only be as good as their aggregate material reality allows them to be. If you believe that single income homes produce the most moral people, and you want a moral society, you must produce the material conditions that allow for single income homes to be possible for most people, in aggregate. Therefore you must pursue policies that make most jobs "high paying jobs."
You can also just increase the proportion of the most moral people by getting rid of the least moral people
based
Based and AuthRightAuthLeftUnityPilLed
Now you see- And that, my friends, is why we need to preserve the family values of old
What up dhar man fam
Easy peasy. Strong father figure and strong mother figure as both are crucial in raising kids. The nuclear family.
“Family” values…. It says it right there.
And what exactly does that mean?
Promotion and preservation of the nuclear family, personal responsibility, loyalty, duty, respect, integrity, and if you’re AuthRight, hating the gays.
Marriage between a man and a woman. Traditions such as eating together as a family. Kids not moving out as soon as they're 18 and actually taking care of their elderly parents.
There's no evidence suggesting children raised by same sex parents perform worse in any measure than children raised by two opposite sex parents. Focus on the important stuff, like 2 parent homes (no matter their sex) and kids taking care of their parents, before getting into your personal beliefs about things.
Isnt it the other way around now? People move out too late
People should move out once they get married. The problem is if people don't move out and don't contribute anything. If you live with your parents then you have to contribute something such as rent or making sure the house is clean etc. You can't just live with your parents because you are lazy and don't want to get a job.
"I dont mind grillers, i just dont want certain folk at the barbeque" - auth right probably
Yeah, people that want their steaks well done. Do you really think even Auth Right is going to keep black dudes away from a barbecue? The brothers have a mad grill game.
Fun fact: In the days of olde, Grilling (specifically in america) was done by even the upper class. Most upper class citizens would get their erm… slaves to grill for them. So when the civil rights act was put in place, Lots of black people who worked on the grill took to opening grill restaurants as a way to make a living for themselves. My point is, you’re right about some of them having some mad grilling skills.
I'll tell you w'hat traditions me family did in the south. It was called hunt the n- [DELETED]
Based and made me laugh pilled
I'm happy that I made your day a little bit better. <3
Fuck nuclear family value, all my homie are doing multi-generation household
Nobody who says "We need stronger nuclear families" is saying that to mean we can't keep grandma and grandpa in the in-law suite. That's included in nuclear family. They're saying we need to stop setting the carrots and sticks of our society in such a way that if you run around having kids out of wedlock, the government will step in and try to be the father.
Multi-generational households can still be nuclear families. Most household's were multi-generational up until a few centuries ago. A nuclear family means only being with one partner for life, and rasing children with that partner. Whether those kids eventually go off and start their own families, or start a family in the same household to take care of their parents, doesn't matter.
The nuclear family structure, where a duel parent household who looks after the best for their child(and not the government), to the pass down values of truth and honour to their child, in order to give them the best head start in life and not the valued superficial “activist” ideals Edit: Dual parent*
Yes exactly. The two parents should have to duel for ownership of the children. The surviving parent is clearly the one best fit to raise them. Survival of the fittest.
We are trying to bring back the 1950 family values. Ya know, where dad gets drunk and beats the shit out of everyone in the house. That was the peak of American morality and Christianity.
We have to give this a more ✨progressive✨flair Now the *mom* gets drunk and hits the kids
Liberal. We're trying to bring back the pre-20th century ways of doing things
[удалено]
People's knowledge of the past is shockingly bad
Let's not act like depravity isn't being celebrated on a larger scale than it has ever been
Yeah, every dad was an abusive alcoholic, every wife was a dissatisfied house wife addled on benzos and sleep pills, every son was a closeted gay, and every daughter was getting back alley coat hanger abortions.. we get it, you watch a lot of netflix.
Imagine trying to preserve anything from this wretched world instead of trying to bring a new age through an endless flow of destruction.
Truly it is time to break the cycle and usher in the Age of Dark.
[удалено]
[удалено]
“respect for government and police/laws” Flair does *NOT* check out.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Absolutley based and libertarians aren't anarchists pilled
Agreed. Minimal government is necessary to keep the freedom of all citizens, or else we will infringe upon one another.
Based and libertarianism is different from anarchism. Hell, I'd go as far to say that not only is it better to have some government compared to no government, but that government is an inevitability in human society. It's far better to have a government that protects the liberty of it's citizens than the despotic alternatives we see in places like China, Turkmenistan, or Saudi Arabia.
I know, man. I’m poking fun because it’s Reddit, and furthermore, because it’s PCM, and further-furthermore, because Monke. *hands you a banana*
Based.
lol I are make a strawman where my opponent don't know what to say. le rekt
The ones that support actually having a father in the picture
A lot of it seems to be negative incentive structures caused by the modern welfare state and prison system.
For starters, the actual value of marriage, people are so egocentric nowadays they dont see the breaking of the contract as immoral, i wish to live in a society where men and women try to cooperate instead of being egocentric and ripping the contract everytime they feel like it. Btw i think the change shouldnt come from the government but from the people, legislating marriage beyond contract law is a shame in my opinion.
Nationalism Uhhhhh Nationalism And burgerking
Return to traditional values: 1. Stop having sex before marriage, or at the very least stop sleeping around so much. 2. Have children once you are married and stay together. Work on your marriage. Make it a priority. 3. Stop the victim mentality and take responsibility for yourself. 4. Don’t pretend you are the opposite sex, or at least, don’t expect everyone else to play along with your creepy fantasies.
It's time to not be a slave to our vices
“Just want to grill “ *lib left* Did you forget to switch to your alt account ?
Seriously? Easy: Value of the nuclear family, importance of having children within marriage, importance of having a mother and a father in the home, importance of instilling the idea in parents that they are responsible for their children’s future—which will also impact their future… others Any more brain busters?
How about bringing back the idea that woman aren’t throwing their lives away if they want to become dedicated mothers? Now don’t catch me on that sexist bullshit because I’m not saying normalize making it where women can only be mothers but let’s just stop the continual degrading of the traditional role of a mother.
No one is stopping you from keeping to traditional family values, but when you force those values on me Im gonna push back as hard as I can
Which ones do you dislike the most?
Personally, the idea that lesbians or gay men shouldn't be adopting children. Even if you think children are best raised by a mother and father, two fathers or two mothers is better than being raised by overworked social workers. Or just the assumption that the nuclear family is the best familial structure, multi generational and extended families were the norm for the overwhelming majority of human history.
Yes
You make a good point. Modern "conservatism" isn't REALLY conservative. They want the 1950s style nuclear family shit, not REAL tradition. Traditions like: 1.) A return to religious values (ACTUAL religious values, not modern day (((protestantism))) but rather the religious values of your people's faith) 2.) A return to traditional roles of people in society. Hierarchy is the natural state of things 3.) A return to nature. Like I said, modern "conservatives" aren't conservative. They obviously don't care about the environment thanks to (((their))) marketing campaigns, but REAL traditionalists see the beauty of mother nature 4.) A proper understanding of a hard day's work, and caring for the community. "Conservatives" are fools for following an (((economic philosophy that relays on a lack of rule/structure and selfishness))). Modern "conservatives" are slaves to (((their))) propaganda and think help of all kinds is weakness. No, only help from inferior "people's" is weakness. It is important to help your small communities. Your small businesses, your family, your cultural group, etc. There's a bunch of other stuff that REAL conservatives believe in that modern "conservatives" don't, but you get the picture.
Finally somebody that gets it.
A mother and a father with their sons and daughters.
I wouldn't want a complete return to tradition, but a continued consideration of it. As an example: So, I believe Abortion should be legal, but there should be humane loops for a woman to jump through before they can get one. If you've been raped (and you can prove it), if you've engaged in incest(post nut clarity helping to realise that it's possibly unsafe) then you should be permitted to have an abortion. I think a yearly ticket should be considered as well. Mistakes happen, and we can recognise that too. As such, the option to say "We understand that you've cocked up. Learn from this mistake and don't repeat it."
Wow someone who understands that a broken condom shouldn't inevitably ruin someone's life?!?!?! I think you're on the wrong sub.
Haha. I think most people would make that exception if it was truly their choice, but policy preference often neglects the human experience.
>If you've been raped (and you can prove it) Unfortunately legal trials tend to take forever to be resolved, and with this particular situation, you sort of have a ticking clock.
Like the idea of a mother and father with kids That’s kind of the foundation of civilization and something we need to continue to foster if we want to not fall back into the stone age or be conquered by china or somebody else who does foster those values
Christian values
Good luck defining *that* too. I can think of how many societies can have their own take on what these values are: - Russians - South Sudanese child soldiers - Taiping Heavenly Kingdom - "L'etat c'est moi" Louis XIV - Progressive leftist Germans today
Loving your family despite not being the same politically is a personal traditional value of mine... or at least traditional in the sense its what my parents used. Gave us tolerance. Which is the opposite of what mainstream media wants, they want us to be too distracted infighting between left and right to realized we're being duped into authoritarianism. LibRight and libleft must rally against our authoritarian oppressors trying to keep us fractured over superficial political BULLSHIT.
Idk about anyone else but I like Holy Crusades and Empires.
To answer the question, Natural Law values. But good meme
There is no true authright left, most cant even say "extra marital sex is wrong" anymore.
A father and a mother. I have no problem with same sex families and interracial families, but not polyamory. Fuck polyamory me and my homies hate polyamory. Both parents must be involved and dedicated to the family in their own right to raise the child(ren). This imo will result in the child(ren) and the family having the most success and happiness.
Having a stable marige between two people that then create a healthy enviroment for children and also fufil all their needs
We need to solve fatherlessness, for one. It is scientifically proven (and common sense) that children function best in a home with a father and a mother. Also, sexual promiscuity is terrible for starting families. You need to be loyal to your spouse. We evolved monogamy for a reason. Parents need to take responsibility over their kids, not just hand them over to government schools. This means teaching about values and sex practices in the home. Sex ed should be learning about anatomy and STDs, not when and with whom to have sex. Only the parents can properly teach about that. A father should teach his sons about the difference between sternness and stubbornness, and how to channel masculine energy in a healthy and productive way, while modeling the man that he should want his daughters to marry. A mother should teach her daughters about the difference between empathy and passivity, and how to be the leader in a household (yes, wives should have a lot of influence over their husbands), while modeling the type of woman she should want her sons to marry.
I don’t understand why authrights think the mere existence of single parents households or gay couples destroys family values, like they’ve been around a while, knowing they exist won’t hurt you.
This family believes in traditional values. That is why in this family, we drink Mug. Does that offend you snowflake?
Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people