Rediscovering
Family Values:
On the 12 th of January, Pope Benedict XVI returned to the topic of de facto relationships. To be precise we should say that the Pope talked about the
centrality of the family . The decision not to legally recognise de facto couples is a logical consequence of the importance attributed to family values. The fundamental question, which is destined to dominate the cultural and political debate of this century, is as follows: do we believe that the family – intended as the permanent union between a man and a woman with the aim of procreating, taking care of their offspring, and accompanying them towards full maturity – should be supported and encouraged by our national legislations? For various decades now the family as an institution has been weakening. Already during the last century, Marx and Engels (particularly the latter with his book
The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State ) had hypothesized that the family was destined to disappear. The mainly socialist society of the future would separate its sexual instincts from its sense of responsibility for its offspring, and children's education would be entirely nationalised and entrusted to the state. Indeed, the
dissolution of the family progressed (particularly in the second half of the 20 th century), but the forecast possibility of substituting the family's
educational functions with other educational agencies and the intervention of the state were revealed to be false. The family
has become weaker, but it has certainly not been replaced in its educational, welfare and
social tasks. The results are clear to everyone. Children are not being born, or too few of them are born. Of those few who are born, some grow up in dysfunctional or non-existent families, making it hard for them to become emotionally mature and responsible adults. The state is finding it increasingly hard to pay sufficient old age pensions and to provide senior citizens with adequate medical assistance because there are too few young people working and paying their taxes and contributions. Senior citizens are increasingly abandoned to their own devices, excluded from a family structure and a prey to loneliness and depression. Public opinion is starting to regard euthanasia as the "easy" solution to the problem of old people's social exclusion, their cultural isolation and the lack of companionship in their search for the meaning of life and of their imminent death. It is clear that a person's sexual habits are a primordial expression of his or her personality, and as such come under the sphere of privacy and personal self-determination. The state has no right to stick its nose in people's bedrooms and to check what they are up to or what type of relationships they have, whether marital, extramarital, heterosexual or homosexual. This is not the problem. The problem is not one of freedom, but something else entirely. Should politics promote the family and encourage young people to believe in love, to consider it a life long emotion and a fertile ground for procreation? Should we focus on
measures supporting women who dedicate their lives to an educational and social family role? Should we make it easier for women to leave the work market when their presence in the family is particularly important and to rejoin the workforce when they wish to improve their career prospects? Should we prioritise the problems of young couples, and help them find work and a home in which to build a family? Should we, through culture, the cinema, music and the theatre, promote family values, and a true conjugal love to which it is worth dedicating our lives? We respect homosexuals' rights. However, we don't believe that the spotlight should be placed on the dissolution of the "traditional" family, but rather on renewing and strengthening family values. There exist civil rights measures to tackle the problems experienced by homosexuals. We are not againscting these measures. While we recognise the rights of homosexuals as people, we don't accept the idea that homosexuality be regarded as an alternative life style whose value is equivalent to that of the family. The real question is: should we promote the recovery of family
Values and their political prioritisation, or should politicians have to deal with the dissolution of the traditional social model and the futuristic search for new models in a “post-family” society in which the family is no longer the primordial social unit? Europe and the United States have already gone down this route, with disastrous results. Should we not acknowledge this failure? Should we not try to understand and share in the renewed focus on family values experienced in US politics since the 1980s? The real heart of the matter lies in the need to foster a family and society model. This is the definitive political question of the
century just begun.
More reviews about the The Golden Report, Jerusalem