Why is the idea that parents are responsible for raising, paying for and protecting their own kids completely lost?
That would allow them to dictate how their children think and behave, including modeling responsibility, and impulse control. Better for the state and media outlets to take over, to make a more malleable populace.
Pretty simple, any state (as secular or as religious as you like) has an interest in doing things that perpetuate it, and keeping the birth rate above replacement perpetuates the state. Therefore it's generally understood by most people in most cultures that those who choose not to participate in being fruitful and multiplying have some other duty to assist with those who do participate.
Since you have put forward no means by which the unmarried person should contribute to society, you are advocating for special rights for singles that, if adopted by everyone, would lead to extinction. If you were once to say that singles should do something for society more than just be proud of hoarding wealth for themselves, that would have been notable.
...because saying pro puts one contrary to contra.
Why is the idea...
...because others suggest idealism to tempt ones consent into idolatry.
values
There can be only one value (perceivable) for each ones evaluation (perception)...others suggest pluralism to devalue evaluation with artificial value.
That would allow them to dictate how their children think and behave, including modeling responsibility, and impulse control. Better for the state and media outlets to take over, to make a more malleable populace.
Pretty simple, any state (as secular or as religious as you like) has an interest in doing things that perpetuate it, and keeping the birth rate above replacement perpetuates the state. Therefore it's generally understood by most people in most cultures that those who choose not to participate in being fruitful and multiplying have some other duty to assist with those who do participate.
Since you have put forward no means by which the unmarried person should contribute to society, you are advocating for special rights for singles that, if adopted by everyone, would lead to extinction. If you were once to say that singles should do something for society more than just be proud of hoarding wealth for themselves, that would have been notable.
...because saying pro puts one contrary to contra.
...because others suggest idealism to tempt ones consent into idolatry.
There can be only one value (perceivable) for each ones evaluation (perception)...others suggest pluralism to devalue evaluation with artificial value.
Jews.
Huh?
You asked questions. You got the answer.
Yes, but the answer is inherently contradictory to your retarded worldview.
You're saying Jews oppose communism, when your entire shtick is "Muh Jewish global communism"
Jews oppose communism as long as it stops shy of National Socialism which opposes communism.
National Socialism is fucking communism. It's the same retarded failure economics, they just made it "the race" instead of "the state".
By kicking out the jew bankers behind communism... Right 🤣
Here we see the Nazi retard try to summon an argument with negative IQ.
Also, you didn't hate bankers when you were begging Chase Manhattan for cash to keep your shit ideology going.
Translation: “I don't know your worldview.”
Never happened. Reply again, admitted paid jewish shill.