So, in essence, the Biden White House is trying to sneak in a provision that would essentially require employers to provide accommodations for women seeking to have abortions – the exact opposite of what the measure was intended to accomplish.

There are sites that allow you to submit pictures of people you know and the AI will re-render these photos with these people in the nude, violating people’s privacy in some of the worst ways imaginable.

It can now screen job candidates, which is terrifying when you consider how pervasive and thorough an AI can be in looking into your digital footprint, and combined with the creator’s bias, you may not find a job in your field ever again. //

An AI is just as biased as its creator, and if the creator has given an AI the responsibility of running anything from a search algorithm to moderating a social media website, you can expect the social atmosphere to shift whichever way the programmer’s ideals dictate. News, opinions, and audio/video cuts will all lend toward a certain bias that could affect anything from peer-to-peer conversations to elections. //

You might scoff at this idea, but one of the big dangers AI poses is becoming a sex partner that would give way to a massive decline in the population as birth rates would spiral downward.

Don’t scoff at this idea. There are people hard at work on making this happen already. Vice once did a report on this very issue where they saw this AI/automaton in development for themselves. Combining the tech of a well-built and useful humanoid robot, an advanced AI that is subservient to humanity, and a synthetic but increasingly realistic human body will present something that distracts heavily from human-to-human relationships. Before you know it, people are having sex with machines and not each other, causing a population dive: //

AI will effectively kill us off by getting in the way of birthrates.

If you see this as implausible then I need only present you with the issue in Japan. The rise of the “Otaku,” or people who primarily live isolated lives, is a real threat to Japan’s birth rates which have declined so significantly that it’s become a very real crisis the country is having to deal with.

at the end of your life, all your adventure and possessions and successes will mean nothing if your children hate you. Being “faithful to yourself” is not some kind of self-help victory. It is a surefire way to end up lonely and alone. Being faithful to others before yourself requires a measure of sacrifice. It costs you something on the front end, but on the back end, when you are old and weak and the world has sped past you, it will leave you with the most valuable type of wealth – the wealth of family.

My relative wanted his happiness on his timeline. He didn’t think he should have to pay for it. In the end, he paid handsomely. He found out the hard way that if you do not honor your family, happiness will not follow you to the grave. You will end your life in sadness and loneliness when you need faithfulness and happiness the most. //

I’m sure this Piqué character is having the time of his life and thinking that when he’s done with the hazy, heady days of youth, he’ll be there for his children and be there to reconnect.

But love is like a bank, and if you don’t invest (and investment means sacrificing something right now) in your early years, your account will be empty in your later years. You’ll have the perks of youth to distract you from your emptiness, but youth is fleeting. When you get old, the bank will be empty, and you’ll be left like my relative – old and lonely and despised.

Let your faithfulness to your family be your priority now, even if it’s not sexy or fun all the time. You will not live forever. You won’t even be young for that long. You will grow old and die, if you are so blessed. Think ahead. Plan for that retirement. Invest in love now, invest in self-sacrifice now, invest in the promises you made to your loved ones now.

Or suffer the consequences later. And don’t you dare complain.

But after the birth of Kondo’s third child in 2021, she came to an important realization about the supposed “need” to keep a home tidy “at all times.” And as the WaPo recently reported, she’s admitted that it’s okay to have a messy home because sometimes priorities change:

Kondo says her life underwent a huge change after she had her third child, and external tidying has taken a back seat to the business of life. “My home is messy, but the way I am spending my time is the right way for me at this time at this stage of my life,” she said through an interpreter at a recent media webinar and virtual tea ceremony.

[…]

Kondo says that, for many, the perfectly organized space is not realistic. “Up until now, I was a professional tidier, so I did my best to keep my home tidy at all times,” she said at the event. “I have kind of given up on that in a good way for me. Now I realize what is important to me is enjoying spending time with my children at home.”

Congratulations!

You are about to get married and begin the adventure of a lifetime!

Together, you are deciding which Method of Natural Family Planning (NFP) or Fertility Awareness Method (FAM) best suits your values, lifestyle, and gives you the confidence you are looking for in avoiding pregnancy (and for achieving pregnancy when you’re ready).

Finding the right method is key for becoming confident in practicing NFP and enjoying everything this lifestyle has to offer you as a couple.

At Natural Womanhood we have supported thousands of couples in this journey. We understand your questions and needs, and we want to make this important decision easier for you.

Many low-resource areas of the world are short on medical technology, including incubators. So why not turn parents into pseudo-incubators? When a baby is born prematurely, a good way to help the baby survive and thrive is simply to hold it close to a parent's naked chest. No technology needed!

That's the essence of kangaroo care.

It's a method of holding the baby, clad only in a diaper, right up against a parent's bare chest for skin-to-skin contact. In 1978, physician researchers Edgar Rey Sanabria and Héctor Martínez-Gómez introduced the technique at the maternity ward of the San Juan de Dios Hospital in Bogota, Colombia. //

"It was what we had to do and it saved my child's life" //

"It creates a link to my child and brings me closer with my wife" //

"I started taking part ... to give the love of a father to my children"

Every publicized mass-shooting incident elicits the same rhetoric of gun control from the “left” and reactionary gun-rights protection from the “right.” We dig into the assailant’s social-media history to find out what he was interested in and inquire about his video-game usage. //

We do everything possible to find the root cause of a broken man showing such disregard for life — yet we consistently overlook a significant contributing factor: fatherlessness.

So there is no misunderstanding: No matter how horrible your childhood was, it does not give you license to take the lives of innocent people. Like everyone else, I have no tolerance for such an act of evil.

At the same time, I recognize that people aren’t born murderers; they’re a creation of life experiences that lead them to decide to cross that line. //

A child’s most important parental figure is the same-sex parent because children model themselves after them. For young men, having that father figure in their lives provides a blueprint for manhood and a source of protection from the outside world.

The world can at times be harsh for young men, but your father is supposed to be your source of security, a builder of confidence and a teacher for how to regulate your emotions in stressful situations. Most crucial, the father is the son’s purpose compass as he helps guide him throughout the trials of adolescence towards purposeful adulthood.

But what happens when there is no father in a child’s life? What happens to those boys when their compass is nowhere to be found? They all too often become lost boys and grow into lost men. //

What people misunderstand about mass shooters is that they are more suicidal than homicidal. To do something of this nature, you have to no longer care whether you live or die. The action of taking other people’s lives in the process of killing themselves is a way for them to grab attention on the way out because they’ve spent a significant portion of their lives feeling invisible.

The flaws of an old hypothetical also illuminate the weakness of contemporary arguments for abortion grounded on claims of bodily autonomy.

Judith Jarvis Thompson’s hypothetical: If you were kidnapped and used as a life-support system for an ailing virtuoso, would you have the right to disconnect him? Nonetheless, its argument from autonomy is, if anything, now more central to the case for abortion.

This emphasis is largely a byproduct of the ultrasound pictures on our fridges and social media feeds. It is difficult to dismiss human lives in utero as worthless clumps of cells when you can count their fingers and look at their faces. So abortion supporters increasingly echo Thompson’s claim that no one should be compelled to sustain another person, whether violinist or fetus. Thus, a woman has an absolute right to violently end the human life developing in her womb. //

The violinist scenario is a hypothetical freak of medicine, whereas pregnancy is the normal reality of human reproduction. This normalcy, in turn, reminds us that we were all once utterly dependent in utero, and that most of us will be dependent again, whether from illness, injury, or old age. In short, we are all the violinist.

Human solidarity recognizes this shared dependence. Ignoring it, or trying to avoid it, has been a great failure of the liberal political tradition. Liberal discourse privileges independent, rational adults (or at least adults who imagine themselves such). But independent, rational adults don’t need solidarity, they need a non-aggression pact and mechanisms for conflict resolution—which is what classical liberal theorists such as John Locke sought to provide. //

Abortion’s dissolution of family solidarity poisons everything. Abortion culture encourages men and women to use each other rather than to love each other. Abortion culture teaches us to treat children as expensive commodities, rather than welcoming them as blessings. //

Family requires solidarity, which abortion destroys, both directly by violently ending unborn lives and indirectly through the culture this enables and encourages. And when solidarity decays within family life, it will not endure socially or politically.

This is why the promises of abortion advocates have proven false. Thompson’s weird hypothetical invites us to disconnect the violinist, but abortion disconnects all of us from the love and solidarity that enable genuine human flourishing.

As to the specific things Harrison Warren advocates, they are primarily the same tired socialist proposals that were in vogue before LBJ’s Great Society; their objective is the infantilization of single mothers and the funding of a massive social service bureaucracy. We know that the government programs that attempt to implement these plans don’t produce anything but more poverty and more bureaucrats. What is more disturbing is that she is essentially pushing the same slander that we on the pro-life side have heard from the pro-aborts for years, that is, that we don’t care about the baby after it is born.

What is missing from Harrison Warren’s critique?

Family, for one. At no point does she encourage marriage or not banging everything in sight. Men are marginalized in our society. They earn fewer than half of all college degrees.

They are more likely to drop out of school, participate in the workforce, use drugs, and be involved in serious crimes.

The focus on “empowering economically disadvantaged women” totally misses the cultural genocide being wrought on our young men. If it “take two to tango,” maybe being married to a man who has earning ability is a better solution for father, mother, and child than being enrolled in a government program that will penalize the woman through loss of entitlements, if she does get married or improves her economic status. Maybe, hear me out, a committed relationship is better socially, economically, and psychologically than a hook-up app. Perhaps addressing the “demand” part of the equation instead of monomaniacally focusing on the “supply” issue is in order. //

Evangelizing is hard work, but the fact is that without some religious foundation, without changing hearts, trying to change the culture is a lost cause. I was stunned that a priest (even an Anglican) could approach an issue so profoundly intertwined with orthodox Christianity as abortion and not call for greater involvement by churches in assisting pregnant women. Totally anecdotal, but my experience is that those churches with the most robust pro-life ministries are also very likely to be actively involved in helping pregnant women in all aspects.

Perhaps making common cause with pro-aborts is a really, really stupid idea. Social movements are subject to the Iron Law of Bureaucracy, the same as any government agency. That law is “in any bureaucratic organization; there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.” I don’t have to tell you in which category you’d find the pro-aborts and where those folks who’ve spent decades on the picket lines would be. Inviting pro-aborts into the pro-life movement, unless they’ve had an “Abby Johnson moment,” serves no useful purpose.

It is said that every cause starts out as a movement, then it becomes a business, and finally, a grift. Since Roe became law, the pro-life movement has stayed true to its founding vision (with some exceptions). There is a lot of work to be done, but, unlike just a year ago, you can now visualize a time when abortion will be illegal in most states, and normal people will recoil in horror at the idea of killing a baby because it is inconvenient. We should all look forward to that day when we can say our work is done. We’ve eradicated abortion and changed the culture so that families are stronger and single mothers have a safety net that does not involve a caseworker and a handout. And then we should lock the doors and turn out the lives and go back to our homes, churches, and communities and sustain what we have accomplished by how we live our lives.

No, reversing Roe doesn’t mean the work of the pro-life movement is over; neither does it mean that we become campaigners and salesmen for the administrative state.

[Kanye West] knew the fakeness of the reality world and dove in anyway. He knew all he was looking for was an accessory, and Kim Kardashian is a walking Barbie doll, more plastic than biological material these days. He knew it, and that’s what he liked about her. They were going to be a power couple, from fashion to business to family. Ye was building an empire and Kardashian was the perfect Empress.

Things change when you become a parent. The world shifts, and what you thought was most important completely drops out of view. Kanye West, the father, was a lot different than Kanye West, the artist. He had viewed his marriage as a type of art installation, but West seemed to abhor the idea of making a public experiment of his family. He’s been complaining about their presence on social media and television since nearly the beginning.

Sadly for him, it’s far too late for a do-over. As I was thinking about the celebrity drama my daughter was engrossed in on her phone, I couldn’t help but feel a little sad for the entire West family. They are surrounded by chaos and craziness right now, and it’s all because their father got what he wished for.

He never chose a partner, he chose a decoration.

The tough lesson Kanye West is learning is one we can all stand to be reminded of.

Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it. //

What I am saying is simple- dream big, choose wisely. Make an effort to draw out the potential consequences of your choice to their possible conclusions, and ask yourself if you’re willing to live that way to have what you want in the here and now.

You want a handsome, wealthy man, but are you willing to accept the ego that often comes with? You want a popular, desired wife, but are you willing to accept what kind of mother that wife will be, and who she may make your children into? You want to be the boss, but are you willing to accept that the people you thought were friends may not like you at all once you write their work reviews?

Choose wisely, because the one thing you cannot choose is time. It marches on with or without you and one day you will be looking at a really sad and tragic consequence of your choice and you’ll have to ask yourself, “Was it worth it?”

Decide now, not when regret is at your doorstep.

A fertility awareness method (FAM) is a modern, evidence-based method of charting one’s menstrual cycle, through observable biological signs unique to each woman, that helps a woman know more about her hormones, overall health, and when during her cycle she is naturally fertile or not. With the information obtained by observing and charting certain biomarkers of fertility, a woman is equipped to reach health goals with greater precision and family planning goals with high rates of effectiveness.

Fertility awareness methods can help a woman understand her body’s menstrual cycle and hormone health and identify and treat reproductive disorders. They can also be used as methods of natural family planning (NFP) that equip a woman to know when she is fertile and when she isn’t, at natural times in her cycle. By avoiding intercourse during periods of her cycle when she is fertile, a woman can use a FAM as a form of natural birth control, and at effectiveness rates that rival pharmaceutical birth control. //

Which FAM should you choose?

The first and most important question is “What do you feel that you can commit to today?” A person’s needs, hormones, and capacities shift over the years, so what works today might not work in a year—or in five years. It’s important to take into account variables like the cost of the method, accessibility to a certified FAM educator (although these days most of them teach online!), and fitting biomarker observations and charting into their schedule. //

One of the greatest advantages of using a fertility awareness method is how they can help identify hormonal imbalances and teach you more about your body than you ever could learn while on hormonal contraception. And that’s why it is crucial to have Reproductive Endocrinologists, OBGYNs, and General Practitioners well versed in fertility awareness methods. //

For more information on getting started charting your cycles with a Fertility Awareness Method or method of Natural Family Planning, check out the following resources:

Replacing babies with pets stifles a person’s capacity to give and receive love, as it wrongly directs our greatest earthly affections toward ourselves. //

In a recent Fox News piece, sociologist Andrea Laurent-Simpson writes of the emergence of “multispecies families,” explaining that in “child-free families…dogs and cats paw in to fill a longing to nurture” and would-be grandparents “readily shift over to spoiling the granddog as their daughters and sons choose instead to pursue lucrative careers.” But this is neither good nor new.

The ancient historian Plutarch began his life of Pericles with an anecdote about Caesar, who, upon seeing “wealthy foreigners in Rome carrying puppies and young monkeys about in their bosoms and fondling them” asked, “if the women in their country did not bear children.” Plutarch thought this a “princely” rebuke of “those who squander on animals that proneness to love and loving affection which is ours by nature, and which is due only to our fellow-men.”

Another ancient text tells us that there is nothing new under the sun. There is certainly nothing new about treating pets as substitutes for children, though it does seem to be more common of late, a trend that debases us and deforms our pets — literally in some cases. The overbreeding of dogs has, for instance, produced breeds that struggle to breathe or routinely need C-sections to give birth. If these people love dogs, then it is with a selfish and consumerist sort of love.

Of course, we ought to love our pets. But this love must be directed to them as the animals they are, rather than as mere objects for our amusement, or as substitutes for children. I love my dogs and try to take good care of them. They were bred to be loveable, and they are entertaining and affectionate. And they have a place in family life. With the right training and supervision, dogs and kids are great for each other. My daughter really, really loves our dogs. Notably, neither she nor the dogs are confused about who is the human. That sort of disordered affection requires an adult.

Pets may be valuable companions to the lonely and childless, but it is perverse to make this palliative measure into a preference, deliberately rejecting children in favor of a pampered pet. //

But what we need are other persons. We are, in important ways, incomplete and not fully human on our own. As Aristotle long ago noted, man is a social animal, and a man who can live without others must be either a beast or a god — people who don’t need people aren’t really people.

The Christian may add that in exceptional circumstances or vocations a few people may need to rely entirely on animal companionship and the person of God, but there is no good reason to deliberately turn to beasts in place of persons.

Federalist Publisher Ben Domenech explained that children and the families who raise them are the bedrock of our communities and make our country great during Fox News “Primetime” on Wednesday.

Domenech began by pointing out that “today’s woke leftist hate many, many things: the Constitution, Donald Trump, Fox News, comedy, and, of course, you.” Domenech continued, “There was really one thing that woke socialist progressives seem to hate more than anything else,” before answering: “That’s babies.”

Domenech decried “the industrialized murder of 60 million unborn infants” and said “the left just doesn’t take their problems out on America’s kids. Their problem seems to be that there are American kids at all.”

“Radical environmentalists regard children as enemies of the climate. Corporate elites see babies as expensive competitors for the time, attention, and creativity of professional women, which they apparently feel should belong exclusively to them. Critical race theory con men suggest that babies become racist as early as three months old,” Domenech said. “Radical feminists have built their entire brand around de-prioritizing family life and shaming happy moms as sellouts to the patriarchy.”

“Progressives hate babies because they’re crying, drooling, pooping refutations of everything woke leftists believe,” Domenech continued. “Boys and girls are the answer to the left’s every argument, and the antidote to their poisonous lie.” For instance, he said, “parents learn the hard way that sex is not a social construct. Social constructs don’t pee on you while you are giving them a bath.”

Children possess many virtues and are much more than the “helpless timid victims the leftist people say they are,” and so are we, Domenech said. “That’s the left’s real problem with children.”

Children make families. Boys turn into men. Couples turn into parents, and women become “the archangels we call moms.” Just as the founders envisioned, America is a place where every child, no matter where they started, “has limitless potential and spark of divine.”

Children are also crucial for building communities. “The more attention we pay to our families, the more time we spend with other families at playdates, little league games, church picnics, school plays — children don’t just turn individuals into families, they also pull families into communities.”

“Leftism is an ideology of fear, grievance, and affected helplessness,” Domenech continued, explaining why leftism is so hostile to families. “Every year on Mother’s Day the media is filled with one article after another by childless writers defending their childlessness. … “On Father’s Day, dads have long been similarly held up as objects of correction and ridicule. These sad people protest too much, and they are not convincing anyone.”

“Kids love America, and they inspire us to make her ever more worthy of their love. Parents teach their children how to be good. The children teach their parents how to be great. Together they make America both,” Domenech concluded. “This is not something you have to do. This is something you get to do.”

ABC’s Steve Osunsami asked the Carters about the secret to the longevity of their 75-year marriage. If you are engaged to be married or have yet to find that special someone, please pay attention to President Carter’s words here and write them on your heart. You will receive no better advice than this.

First of all – choose the right person.

This may seem like simple advice. Even easy advice. Do not let the stark truth of this get lost in the simplicity. //

Loving someone is what happens when the clips of the dress bust, and the glamorous exterior falls away, revealing undergarments that don’t seem nearly as attractive as the original dress. And then you choose to keep loving that person anyway.

Being in love is not a good enough gauge of whether or not to marry someone. It costs nothing to fall in love and wallow in that bliss.

Love is a choice.

That choice has to start at the start — to put it as simply as the Carters frame their own marriage. You don’t choose who you fall in love with, but you can choose whom to marry and too many people make bad choices when it comes to the start. A marriage based on a bad choice is going to be a tough road to travel. It can be done, but it will be painful and costly. If you can learn to be discerning before you walk down the aisle, you will spare yourself a lot of heartache down the road. //

Is your partner patient? Does he treat you and others kindly? Is she arrogant or boastful? Is he honest? Is she often selfish or does she anger easily and treat others poorly? Does your partner hold a grudge? Is he able to rejoice in the successes of others or does he instead get a kick out of when bad things happen to successful people? Does your partner choose trust, choose hope, choose perseverance?

These are the simple but foolproof measures of a love that can survive a 75-year marriage.

Oh, but what about sex? Well, there’s an app for that. Another byproduct of modernity is the widespread feminist ideal of “sexual liberation” which, in truth, actually made the sexual value of women decrease by leaps and bounds. If Girl A won’t give it up then Girl B probably will, and technology has made finding her easy.

It’s the perfect recipe for bachelorhood. A man can avoid marriage, keep his money, save himself the stress, have more time to accomplish goals, and avoid involving himself in the crushing weight of emotional slavery.

The solution to the problem is easier said than done. We’ll need a complete societal rework of how women and men are raised as well as portrayed. Men not only need to be taught how to treat a woman but how to be treated and what to expect in order to achieve a solid, stable relationship. Women should, likewise, be taught how to treat a man as well as what to expect.

We also need to leave behind the idea that men and women are the same. We’re not. Everything from our brain function to our bodies is built differently. More accurately, we’re built for different tasks. From the way we process information to the way we interact with the physical world, we are two different entities that belong to the same species.

We should be taught to be mutually beneficial to one another in our own capacities as men and women, not fall prey to these modern ideas. Women shouldn’t be taught that in order to be happy, they must be childless go-getting ball-busters and not waste their life and potential on marriage and children where they become subservient to men. It’s a narrative that sells well in youth but breaks down quickly as women get older, desire children, and wish to leave the workplace to do it.

Men want to feel welcome in their own relationships. Right now, they aren’t. They feel like passengers, or maybe even more accurately, chauffeurs. If women want men to marry them, then women will have to become marriage material and that means leaving behind the mainstream pop-philosophy and looking into the idea that maybe the feminists were wrong. So very, very wrong.

Last week, Schilling explained the group in more detail to Buck Sexton.

“It hit me about a year and a half ago that everyone in D.C. has a special interest arm that’s fighting for them, that’s getting the bad guys unelected and getting their allies elected — except for the American family,” Schilling told Sexton. You have, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Tech, you know you get all these “bigs” but there’s no big family.

“So we wanted to found the Big Family an NRA style membership organization to get families active and engaged in politics. So, if you’re opposing school choice or if you’re fighting for critical race schools or any of this crazy stuff, we’re going to come after you just as you know the NRA puts gun owners after you, we’re going to come after you. We’re going to get you unelected for hurting our kids,” Schilling continued.

We always talk about peoples’ lives mattering. Adam Toledo’s life mattered. Adam Toledo’s life mattered enough that the people around him should never have allowed a 13-year-old child out into an alleyway in the city in the middle of the night with an armed 21-year-old who was a prohibited possessor. No one’s having that conversation! Lives matter! And they matter enough to take care of him, Sean. Lives matter enough that they don’t allow children to get in this situation.

If everybody’s going to be going off on this cop, where are all the adults in Adam Toledo’s life right now? And that is not politically incorrect to say, that is the correct thing that people should be saying right now.

[…]

If Adam Toledo’s life mattered then it is worth it to ask why it didn’t matter enough, apparently, to keep him out of that alley. As a mother, I’m asking!

The stage is being set for the legal marginalization of mothers, fathers, and families by force of law //

ents
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her fellow gender-inclusive enthusiasts have taken a bold and much-disparaged move to erase language that expresses the reality of familial relationships.

In the name of inclusivity, words such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law” might be erased from House proceedings.

If pursued, this scrubbing of gendered words from public communications, in concert with other trans-inclusive initiatives, will prove seismic in its effect on society.

Pelosi and her associates are echoing the socialist-feminist ideology articulated by Shulamith Firestone in the 1970s: “It has become necessary to free humanity from the tyranny of its biology” and “eliminate the sex distinction itself [so that] genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally.”

At its core, that means that male and female manifestations of the human body should no longer be legally recognized or culturally valued. We have been marching down this road for decades and are now approaching the endgame: a genderless society. The vilification of gendered language in public settings is a significant leap toward “freeing humanity from the tyranny of its biology” and undoing the significance of biological sex.

Mothers on the Trash Heap of History
Firestone made a stunning prediction. She jubilantly declared that when biology was subdued and “transsexuality” became the legal and cultural norm, “the blood tie of the mother to the child would eventually be severed” and the triumphal “disappearance of motherhood” would follow. And she was right. Legal movements surrounding transgenderism are setting the stage for the legal marginalization of mothers, fathers, and families by force of law.

Experience the best way to read The Epoch Times online. Try our free app for a limited time.

While Firestone’s astute prediction has been largely overlooked in the debate about transgenderism, the fact remains that when women legally disappear, so do mothers because “mother” is a sex-specific designation. The same goes for fathers. If there aren’t two specific, perceivable sexes that can be definitively recognized by law, then it becomes difficult to define or defend mothers and fathers—along with their parental rights—in legal terms. Therefore, the belonging of children to their parents is increasingly thrown into question and the family stands on trembling legal legs—which is precisely the point. //

When parents’ ties to their children are obscured or weakened, it creates an environment hospitable to government intervention and socialist-communist revolution. That is why Marx’s Communist Manifesto openly called for the “abolition of the family.” Dethroning the family creates a void that can and must be filled—though it’s impossible to adequately fill it. If we are to avoid the destruction of the family and the domination of the state that necessarily follows, we must resist efforts to cancel biological sex. //

A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine, arguably the world’s most prestigious medical journal, asserted that sex demarcations on birth certificates should be reconsidered because “assigning sex at birth perpetuates a view that sex, as defined by a binary variable, is natural, essential, and immutable.” //

what started out masquerading as a celebration of gender turns out to be an edict for the elimination of the sex distinction itself, which, in turn, erodes the family—the essential cradle of humanity. if we are to salvage the family and civilization with it, we must protect and defend the “gendered language” that is now on the chopping block.

why are so many of us emotionally devastated by the death of a celebrity? Some people even mourn the deaths of celebrities or well-known figures more than they do a close relative or friend. Perhaps our society has become so infatuated with the characters created by these “influential” people that we genuinely feel they’re a part of our lives.

Therein lies the problem.

Many Americans have come to value unknown “influencers” more than their family members because they’ve become conditioned to hold celebrities and people of power to untenable heights as if they were demigods worthy of infinite praise.

As a result, who could dare mourn these loved ones equally to or with more significant pain than the loss of a beloved icon? To put it frankly, what have our loved ones done to impact culture or the world?

People will take off from work, seek counseling, and buy expensive souvenirs all to salute their idol, but what about the everyday idols and heroes within our families? Are they too not worthy of the same praise, if not greater? Should they not be elevated for their direct contribution to our lives and our familial experiences?

Family and community are established organically and over time. The networks that we create through the interpersonal and multifaceted webs should absolutely trump this celebrity worship. Reinforcing these strange relationships only degrades the unique and authentic intimacy tied to personal loss or tragedy.

There must be a deep sense of emptiness within man that we permit the deepest aspects of the human heart to be relegated to absolute strangers. //

Society’s current reversal of these suggests a breakdown of our familial structure, which points to an even more concerning breakdown of our society because the family structure builds strong character. The collapse in this moral character further weakens community structures, and which collectively weakens our once strong nation.

The future of America rests on this.