I would love to see an honest public discussion of these issues, where economics, mating, parenting, family values, freedom, and public policy intersect. It's a discussion no society has had the guts to have, maybe ever.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Advocating pronatalism and family values, as I've often done.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You think sex and love are zero-sum?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Define "early." Define "restrict." Define "impose." Define "equality of mating outcomes." Come on. That's a fatuous argument.
-
'Early' = discourage premarital sex. 'Restrict' = outlaw any form of marriage other than monogamy. 'Impose' = give tax incentives for monogamous marriage.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I advocate for family values, traditionalism, and pronatalism all the time, at the cultural level. I just don't want gov't involved in family policy.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also Libertarians: No examples pure enough except their pot-induced utopian dreams. You can already have multiple, interlocking partners in society. No one is sending you to jail.
-
People do get sent to jail for having multiple partners. There are 'bigamy laws' that prohibit multiple marriages, for example. The law only recognizes monogamy.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Economics and self-interest will already do that. Moreover, government has largely discouraged two parent households by financially incentivizing women to be single mothers. Without these financial incentives, there would be a lot less single parent households to begin with.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.