Libertarians fail to see obvious: moral breakdown inherently linked to big governmen

[renard_ruse]

Libertarians' hearts may be in the right place, but they often fail to see the obvious. When they join with liberals in cheerleading for the breakdown of the family unit and sexual values, they fail to realize how this very breakdown is intimately tied to the big bloated government they claim to oppose.

In short, the orchestrated dismantling of all traditional sexual mores since the 1960s which has now pretty much reached full fruition has had at its core the goal of driving the father out of the family unit. All along the underlying goal of all of the sexual liberations was to destroy the heterosexual married couple as the foundational unit of society, removing the father and by consequence, in the majority of cases, making the state fulfill the role the father used to play in providing for and protecting the mother and children. No doubt, this basic truth will set off the likes of RoryN and no doubt convoluted denials of this fact will be posted in this thread, but you honest liberatarians please ask yourselves, why has the growth in government social programs and nanny statism occured almost in parallel with the increase in single parent homes? Do you really believe its all a big coincidence?

As Pat Buchanan recently pointed out:

"As a result of the sexual revolution promoted by the counterculture of the 1960s, the dominant culture today, 40 percent of all births in the United States are now to single moms.

With no husband, these women look to government to help feed, house, educate, medicate and provide income support for themselves and their children. For sustenance and the survival of their families, they depend on that same Big Government that Republicans denounce at their rallies..."

 

[phrodeau]

How many single moms are there because of military casualties?

 

[FloridaSmoothie]

Libertarians are for smaller government. Therefore, the federal programs that lead to the moral breakdown would be eliminated. What am I missing with the OP?

 

[Sean Renaud]

The idea that the federal policies are causing this isn't actually backed by the stats.

 

[warrior queen]

Gotta love how ALL single parent families get lumped in together.
Why don't you talk about the single mums and dads that just get on with the job of raising families and holding down a job without gov't aid?
Oh, right - that's not news

 

[Sean Renaud]

I highly doubt there are enough of those to be worthy of discussion.

 

[KingOrfeo]

In short, the orchestrated dismantling of all traditional sexual mores since the 1960s which has now pretty much reached full fruition has had at its core the goal of driving the father out of the family unit. All along the underlying goal of all of the sexual liberations was to destroy the heterosexual married couple as the foundational unit of society, removing the father and by consequence, in the majority of cases, making the state fulfill the role the father used to play in providing for and protecting the mother and children

And the state -- which means, ultimately, Congress -- wants that role why?

 

[warrior queen]

I highly doubt there are enough of those to be worthy of discussion.

How do you know that?
Are there stats?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Libertarians are for smaller government. Therefore, the federal programs that lead to the moral breakdown would be eliminated. What am I missing with the OP?

He doesn't know what a libertarian is.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Libertarians' hearts may be in the right place, but they often fail to see the obvious.

As Pat Buchanan recently pointed out:

"As a result of the sexual revolution promoted by the counterculture of the 1960s, the dominant culture today, 40 percent of all births in the United States are now to single moms.

With no husband, these women look to government to help feed, house, educate, medicate and provide income support for themselves and their children. For sustenance and the survival of their families, they depend on that same Big Government that Republicans denounce at their rallies..."

Libertarians believe in safe, affordable, ubiquitous access to BIRTH CONTROL because we do not believe in ghosts like you GOP TEA bagger mother fuckers.

We also do not believe that the family is the fundamental economic unit. We believe in the individual as the fundamental economic unit and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Your 13th century feudal system in the home is revolting and absurd.

Every time you post you prove what a fucking dope you really are.

</end>

 

[KingOrfeo]

Libertarians believe in safe, affordable, ubiquitous access to BIRTH CONTROL . . .

Even if that should prove impossible without some measure of government funding?

 

[Sean Renaud]

How do you know that?
Are there stats?

Just taking a glance at the famous 47% and general wealth disparity in the US. It's a safe bet to make that a fair chunk of the women in that unfortunate situation are receiving some kind of aid. The same goes for fathers in that situation but due to various realities we know there are more single moms than dads.

Besides unless there is something to be gleaned by observing those people aside from them just being more fortunate they aren't exactly a problem. Which generally is what we discuss when discussing politics, problems and solutions. For fairly obvious reasons. And I could be wrong, I'll fully admit that it's an assumption.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Even if that should prove impossible without some measure of government funding?

Not all libertarians are anarcho types...just tossing that out there.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Even if that should prove impossible without some measure of government funding?

Smart Libertarians understand that birth control is a public good. Like National Defense and Public Education.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Smart Libertarians understand that birth control is a public good. Like National Defense and Public Education.

I've never before met a Libertarian who approves of the existence of public schools. (On defense they're more reasonable.)

 

[BotanyBoy]

I've never before met a Libertarian who approves of the existence of public schools. (On defense they're more reasonable.)

Maybe it has something to do with our current public education system being a fucking rip off bro, ever think of that? Of course not when it comes to other peoples money KO thinks we should SPEND IT ALLLLLLL~~!!!

How on earth could anyone look at our rankings and say "Doing great america!! Money well spent!" . Just slightly better than Mexico....really inspires everyone to invest more, I'm sure.

 

[parodyluvr75]

JIZZ.

 

[patient1]

Well, if anybody is pre-occupied with preserving sexual mores, maybe this isn't the best website for them.


I thought that big government was the byproduct of war, not the least of which were
The Cold War (Truman ), The War on Poverty( Johnson), The War on Crime(Nixon) , The War on Drugs( Reagan), and The War on Terror(BushII). As long as the government is "at war" it needs more money, more power, and more cooperation. To do otherwise is treason, after all.

Big Government is the product of bipartisanship, not bisexuality.

 

[Liar]

I'mjust now reading a book by George Friedman, called The Next 100 Years. He had something to say about all this.

What's the cause of the breakup of the traditional family? Medicine. The purpose of the traditional marriage was so that women could spend their often short lives from puberty to menopause squeezing out as many babies as possible. Most of the babies died, but those that lived were money.

Then came medicine, and most of the babies started surviving into adulthood. And at the same time industrialization started demanding more know-how in order to be a productive cog in the wheel. Which meant longer education before they could work. The whole reason for ye olde family unit (squeezing out as many kids as possible) went from being economicl nessecity to economicl suicide.

So then people started marrying for silly reasons like love instead. I blame Jane Austen.

 

[badbabysitter]

I cant help but notice all of renards arguements on society break down to the lack of a woman pregant and barefoot in the kitchen


Socrates was bitching about this 2300 years ago...renard think's its news

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'mjust now reading a book by George Friedman, called The Next 100 Years. He had something to say about all this.

What's the cause of the breakup of the traditional family? Medicine. The purpose of the traditional marriage was so that women could spend their often short lives from puberty to menopause squeezing out as many babies as possible. Most of the babies died, but those that lived were money.

Then came medicine, and most of the babies started surviving into adulthood. And at the same time industrialization started demanding more know-how in order to be a productive cog in the wheel. Which meant longer education before they could work. The whole reason for ye olde family unit (squeezing out as many kids as possible) went from being economicl nessecity to economicl suicide.

So then people started marrying for silly reasons like love instead. I blame Jane Austen.

Makes sense....tag on todays civil/family law and marriage simply becomes bad business in most situations.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

I highly doubt there are enough of those to be worthy of discussion.

I highly doubt you would acknowledge it if there are.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

Libertarians believe in safe, affordable, ubiquitous access to BIRTH CONTROL...

They should think about this before and not after sex. It's not that hard to figure out. If you're having sex, then the guy should wear a condom. Or the woman should be on birth control or a contraceptive.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They should think about this before and not after sex. It's not that hard to figure out. If you're having sex, then the guy should wear a condom. Or the woman should be on birth control or a contraceptive.

I think most would agree with you....fuckin' reality however is that doesn't always happen and it's a situation to be dealt with, and the courts decided the buck stops with mom.

 

[Liar]

Makes sense....tag on todays civil/family law and marriage simply becomes bad business in most situations.

Not to mention that today's civil/family law is also at least in part is rooted in the reality of said child mortality shift and the monumental.

Another thing that the social conservatives ooh's and aah's about stems from the same thing; premarital sex. Industrialization and medicine made it both unnessecary and stupid to start squeezing out kids at age 13. But that didn't stop biology from switching the brain into procreation mode in the early teens.

Also; divorce. Before medicine made women have less kids and die less often in childbirth, men outlived their wives before they got bored with them. The wives didn't have that luxury, since they, well, died. "Til death do us part" was easy to say because on average that wasn't that long. The whole "grow old together" thing was an anomaly. And now we treat it as if it's supposed to be the norm.