I thought we had a policy here that one can't turn questions around on the questioner?
Sure you can, if you've answered the question, which I did, and you didn't like my answer. Of course I can ask you what you would consider a better answer.
I think, to family values, at least in principle, is a focus not as you did on certain individual aspects of moral behavior but on the effect of conduct, behaviors, and productions of society (books, records, movies, etc.) on the impressionable young and opposing those things which, while perhaps they could responsibly be handled by adults, cannot responsibly be handled by children.
First of all, I agree with you. Second of all, I said it first. <g>
<< Two applications of what I think of as family values and that I support are family-friendly workplace policies and a family-safe popular culture and public behavior. If the family values folks want to tackle those aspects in secular-friendly way, I'm with them all the way. >>
Pay attention.
If "family values" doesn't mean a set of virtues--a set of core values pertaining in some way to families--but is instead a catchphrase for a cultural movement, then exercising restraint in front of children is an movement I fully support. The first group I listed, the code words I found in my search, I know you know I don't support. If family values is a movement, then I stated two aspects of it that I support. |
