THE FAMILY AS THE BASIC UNIT OF SOCIETY
The family unit – principally a man and a woman living together in harmony and peace – is and always will be the basic social organization or unit of any society. This relationship alone provides stability in a sexual, emotional, intellectual and social way as no other can.
This statement may seem prejudiced or biased against other forms of social organization, but it has proven true over hundreds and even thousands of years.
Other forms of societal organization include most people remaining single or unattached, homosexuality, or various forms of collective living arrangements that are called free love societies, communes, kibbutz living in some cases, and others. To the best of my knowledge, none of these have worked out on a large scale nearly as well as what is called a monogamous man-woman relationship in terms of stability and happiness for the couple, and for the society as a whole.
When the families are strong, society is strong, as a rule. When families are weak, societies begin to break down. This is the important concept of this article.
EXACTLY WHAT IS MEANT BY A FAMILY?
A family is a unit of two dedicated to healing, even if they do not enunciate it or even understand it fully. It means two who are happy to be together, who want to be together, and who deeply love one another, even though it can just be friends, for example, or a parent and a child. This is what is meant by a family in this article.
Stated differently, the definition of family is two living in a close personal relationship. Close relationships most often exist between family members, but not always by any means. Couples may live together for years and not be that close, for example.
In fact, close relationships often develop among friends of either sex, work colleagues, and perhaps in other situations such as members of a sports team who work and play together constantly, for example. This is important to understand. They don’t even need to live in the same town or know each other personally, as long as they love each other enough.
Also, those living under the same roof must be in a close relationship. Just because two are roommates, for example, or even sexual partners living together, married, church-going, or just “shacking up”, as they call it, does not mean they are a family because they must be in a close, loving relationship with each other. One in relationship with the other, if it is not returned, is not good enough. They both must feel the same way about each other, and this is the key.
The rest of this article deals with various topics related to those living in families, or in close relationships, as explained in the preceding paragraphs.
HEALING WITHIN FAMILIES –
EMPATHIC BLENDING IN FAMILIES
An interesting phenomenon that can be used for healing, but which can also have negative effects, is called empathic blending. It occurs in all close relationships, including, of course, within many families. It is a slight blending of the aura or energy fields of individuals who live together or even those who just work together or recreate together. However, it is much stronger in those who are in intimate relationships and having sex together.
This interesting phenomenon has been known for thousands of years, but is rarely discussed. It can help bind a family or relationship together and help heal all members of a family. Unfortunately, it sometimes also causes problems in families if the man and woman are not that compatible. What this means is that at times, two in a relationship have issues that do not blend well. Each can bring out the worst aspects of another, for example, instead of the best. For more on this topic, read Empathic Blending on this website.
MALE-FEMALE BLENDING IN FAMILIES
This is a subset or type of empathic blending that occurs only between members of the opposite sex. It does not occur in homosexual relationships, and it is one reason these relationships are always inferior to a good man-woman relationship. Two of the same sex may blend empathically, and often do. But only a man and a woman can blend in a very special way. For the same reason, it will not occur in members of an all-male or all-female sports team, work team, etc.
This type of blending is similar to other empathic blending, but much stronger and much more able to cause healing in both parties. It is a powerful advantage to having friends of the opposite sex, a wife or husband, and even having children, at times.
Children and parents. Interestingly, this type of blending can be done between a male parent and a female child, and conversely, between a female parent and a male child. It can even occur between siblings of the opposite sex, too, although this is not nearly as common. To read more about this very exciting method of healing, read Male-Female Blending on this website.
OTHER TYPES OF UNUSUAL HEALING IN FAMILIES AND IN OTHER CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
A phenomenon we observe within families, and within all close relationships, is that when one person begins to heal, particularly a parent, often the partner and the children also experience a degree of healing. This occurs even when the others are not following a nutritional balancing program at all. I call it healing by osmosis, because I don’t know what else to name it.
This phenomenon may be due to empathic blending, described in a paragraph above. However, it may be also be due to other factors, such as less stress in the home, better food in the home, more of a healing atmosphere in the home, or something else.
In addition to these reasons, other reasons help explain unusual healing in those who in close relationships such as in families. For example, as one heals, he or she serves as an example to the other and perhaps as an inspiration to the other. As one heals, the body becomes more capable of love, and this felt by the other As one heals, some nutrients are actually transferred to the other in sexual fluids, for example, or in saliva in kissing. This may sound odd, but these are factors in healing within families or close relationships only.
THE TRADITIONAL FAMILY UNDER ATTACK EVERYWHERE
For the past 100 years of so, the family unit in America and Europe, in particular, has been under constant attack. The attack has been coming from work outside of the home, two parents having to work, the school system that takes away authority of parents, and a much more intrusive government that also takes away the rights and powers of parents to control their children and even their homes. Unemployment is very hard on families, and there is plenty of that in Europe, particularly.
Pressure from Anti-Christian groups such as gay rights advocates and even some women’s advocate groups has also forced the passage of laws that discourage marriage. The growth of the welfare system is another anti-family factor. These systems often contain incentives to have children out of wedlock, for example, in order to collect more money from the government.
Asia has much less of these pressures, but they are growing on a daily basis. Communism, for example, practiced still today in Russia, China, and other large nations, has a devastating effect on the family. Also, Asia has other problems, such as a traditional hierarchical male-dominated culture that may seem to support the family, but really is very hard on women, and impedes the development of deep love between men and women among the population. Other nations, such as those in the Middle East, insist on rules and regulations that are so rigid and strict that they may hold society together, but they stop love from developing because the roles of man and wife are too rigidly defined.
The Muslim world has some serious family problems. Here the family unit is strong, but in some homes the male dominates and the women are treated so badly that they cannot love their husbands and children correctly. I hope someday soon this will stop.
Some of the best family units are found among the Jewish families and some of the Asian cultures, such as the Chinese and Koreans. Even here, however, divorce rates are rising and the traditional family is under attack.
THE NEED TO RESTORE THE INTEGRITY OF THE FAMILY
The above leads us to the need to clarify, correct and realize the importance of the traditional family unit and restore it legally, culturally, socially, and in every other way as well. This is also a goal of nutritional balancing science. It must begin with each person understanding the need for very high-quality relationships, and then acting at all levels of society to push for a more family-friendly society. The kind of reforms needed in society include:
1. Legislative action and tax reform to encourage marriage. This means that married couples should have tax advantages, which is not true today. Often it is the opposite. Also laws must clearly define marriage as the relationship between one many and one woman. All other arrangements of living and sexuality must not be given equal recognition or equal treatment under the law. This means no gay marriage, no homosexual or gay rights laws, and no gay-friendly legislation at all. This sounds harsh, but gay rights laws are the worst thing for the traditional family today.
It also means that polygamy must be banned altogether. It does not matter if all members of a polygamous community like the arrangement. It does not work well and it is usually a cult. For more on this topic, read Cults and Terror Societies on this site.
Tax credits should be given for having children, but only if a couple is married and filing jointly. Society should not be giving tax credits to single parent households of the same magnitude, as it encourages promiscuity and single-parent households. I know this is a difficult area, but it is important to strengthen and protect traditional marriage.
2. Legislative action and tax reform to strengthen families. Here are examples of laws and tax arrangements that favor the family unit in society:
Smaller government favors families. This is because power in society is always shared between individuals and their families, and the government. The more power and scope of the government, the less power and scope the family will have. Laws that should be abolished to assist the family are all laws that allow schools to give out condoms and birth control pills without parental consent, and all laws that allow minor children to obtain abortions and even driver’s licenses without parental consent. Some states claim they can vaccinate children without parental consent, and some allow medical treatment without parental consent. All these laws destroy the integrity and strength of the family unit and ought to be repealed.
I realize that repealing these laws will permit some abuse by uncaring or unthinking parents. However, this is better than an across-the-board rule that damages the family, which is still the best hope for children in the entire world. Government welfare agencies do not do a good job, overall, and I would not expect them to do so. They are too distant and too “professional” to care deeply enough about the children.
Similarly, judges and juries should not have the right to remove minor children from the home unless the abuse is obvious and severe.
Low taxes strongly favor the family unit and family integrity. Much higher taxes for everyone today is forcing two parents to work outside of the home and to send children to government or private daycare centers and pre-schools. This is horrendous for families. While in some nations, the poor and even middle classes do not pay income taxes, they pay for taxes that are hidden in every product and service that they buy. This is the case especially in America and Europe where corporate taxes are high. These are hidden taxes on all products that can account for up to half the cost of the product such as a car, food, clothing, building materials and other necessities.
This is why corporate tax rates should be zero. Tax income, tax consumption, or tax imports and exports, but do not tax in hidden ways such as corporate taxes that no one can see and that are regressive, meaning they harm the poor much more than they harm the wealthy because the poor must spend a lot more of their income on necessities, while the rich can easily afford the taxes on goods and services such as electricity, etc.
Laws that permit, encourage and even pay one parent to stay at home with children and teach them favor the family strongly. Parents should be discouraged from both working outside the home, and young children should be at home. If a parent does not want to raise a child at home, he or she should not become a parent. It is that simple.
Home schooling favors the family unit. In the same vein, home schooling must be encouraged, not attacked, as it is in many nations, including the United States of America. Home schooling is the ideal, and should not be considered a deviant or religious or unusual concept. It is far better, according to statistics, than any school situation. Home schooling parents should not have to pay school taxes, for example, and perhaps should be compensated so that a parent can stay home and teach rather than have to take a job outside the home and send the child to public or private schools.
No death taxes favor the family. Death taxes are also called estate taxes. They do not allow some families to pass on their wealth to their children, or anyone else. Instead, the government takes a large portion of their money, even though they have already paid taxes on that income. Families should be permitted to pass on their wealth, as it is theirs and they often worked hard for it. The government has no right to it, having already taxed it once or perhaps twice.
Tort reform strongly favors families and employment. It is important that if one is truly injured, that one can sue for damages. However, the situation in America, in particular, but also in Europe in which attorneys are able to sue basically innocent people for all sorts of frivolous reasons places great strain and a huge financial burden on everyone. It raises the price of all goods and services, frightens away many businesses and keeps good products off the market. It also supports a class of parasitic attorneys who make good money often by ruining other people’s lives.
There are simple answers for this problem, but the trial lawyers lobby, and their political allies – the Democratic party – has so far prevented them from being implemented, especially in the United States. The solutions include:
1. Simplify legal proceedings so that people do not need attorneys to represent them and can handle simple cases themselves. This is certainly possible, but judges and attorneys don’t like the idea. It is similar to learning how to take care of your health, which the doctor’s don’t like. Court proceedings, rules of evidence, rules of discovery, motions, and so on can be made simpler.
2. The loser in a suit should pay all court and attorney fees. This is the system in Great Britain and some other nations. It can stop some frivolous lawsuits, especially in the health care area, but also in product safety.
3. Attorneys must not be allowed to disqualify jurors at their whim. The only reason to disqualify a juror should be a direct conflict of interest, perhaps. The current system today allows sharp attorneys to get rid of potential jurors whom they sense they cannot manipulate or influence. This should not be the way the jury system works and it makes a mockery of the jury system.
4. It may be necessary to place a cap on damages. This is more complex, especially in a class action lawsuit but sometimes juries are talked into awarding far too much money for damages because attorneys take a percentage for themselves.
A capitalist economic system, with controls to prevent corporate raiding and cheating, tends to favor families, while socialism is usually even more corrupt and it destroys families. It does this because the government gains so much power that the family becomes secondary to government, which becomes the nanny, the provider, the police force and everything else. This must be taught and the reasons for it thoroughly understood in society. The basic reason is that a large, powerful government always competes for power with the family, so it is inherently inimical to the family.
In contrast, a weak government allows the family unit to have more power over itself and over society. It is not an accident that the weakest families occur in communist and socialist nations, while the strongest are found in the capitalist nations.
Private and not socialized, nationalized or “universal” health care helps the family unit. Caring for one’s health and that of the children are extremely important issues that are best handled within families. This is because they have to do with diet, lifestyle, thinking patterns and other personal habits that are learned and practiced in families.
In general, when people are forced into a governmental system, the family loses a lot of power and control over this important area of life. If the government system were perfect, it would not be so bad. However, all governmental systems are more costly, the dietary recommendations are often poor, bureaucrats are distant and don’t care as much for people as private doctoring arrangements, and waste and corruption are worse. Also, just turning over control of this vital area of life is a bad idea.
Even the HMO or PPO system in the USA, which is based on private insurance but herds people into groups with little choice in health care, is not good for family integrity and strength. This is just one reason why Obamacare, for example, in the USA, will not work and must be repealed at once before it further bankrupts the USA, which it is doing and with no good results. It is just socialism, and that is harmful for families, as explained above.
Freedom, in general, is wonderful for the family. Repression in society works against families. Freedoms of religion, of speech, of assembly, the right to bear arms and all the freedoms that some nations permit are helpful for the family as they weaken governmental power and encourage responsibility and power to be centered in the family. Denying the people freedom weakens the family in all cases.
Traditional religions and, in general, religious freedom tend to favor the family unit. However, too much repression in the religion harms families by several means. Repressing women, for example, leads to anger and hatred of women for men and for the religious leaders. Also, if the family roles are so rigidly defined, some will rebel and avoid families altogether. They also, of course, may just leave the religion, but this is not always possible, as with Islam.
As these legal and other changes occur, and only when they occur, we can expect to see great improvements and restoration of our societies. They will be safer, more sane, healthier, with far more emphasis on spiritual values and the dignity of each individual soul. All will be happier and life will be far more worthwhile and enjoyable for women, in particular, for our children, and for everyone.
Easy divorce laws have mixed effects upon families. On one hand, they make it easy for a selfish parent to basically abandon their children or “steal” them from a partner. They may also leave a former partner stranded without financial support at all, or very little.
On the other hand, very strict divorce laws that existed in the past kept families together where there was physical or emotional abuse, or just terrible unhappiness. This is not ideal for families, either.
Many people say that the traditional family is dead, as evidenced by the high divorce rates in the Western world, in particular. However, they forget that although the divorce rate is high, the remarriage rate is also very high.
In other words, many people do not want to be single. They just want to be with the right type of person. If they are not, then they are more likely today than in the past to split up and move on to what is often, though not always, a better marriage the second time around.
When children are involved, the situation is more complex. Children need a stable home and they need love – plenty of it. So it is more complicated. Here one must use good judgment and try to avoid selfishness. Selfishness is often the problem and the reason that a couple does not blend and heal one another.
Laws favoring easy abortions probably harm families. This is an ongoing debate in the USA, though not much in Europe. ALL abortions terminate a life, and some women suffer psychological damage from abortions, even if they are not fully aware of it. I particularly dislike the Planned Parenthood approach, often, in which young women are just told they can get their abortion right away, no one needs to know about it, and that is all there is to it.
However, those who favor abortions rightly point out that women perhaps should have more control over their reproductive abilities, especially in case of rape, incest, and all conditions in which the health and well-being of the mother or even the father is at stake. So I suspect this issue will be debated for many years.
I believe anti-abortion laws are there to protect women in many cases, and
this is how they should be “sold” or promoted. They help women avoid psychological damage that comes with abortions, they help prevent infections and other problems of abortions, and they help the family in many cases, which helps women the most. If the family does not want another child, then put it up for adoption.
Encouraging monogamous man-woman relationships is by far best for the family. Sadly, this is not what is taught in schools today. Politically correct teachers often stress that homosexuality, communal living, open marriage and other “alternatives” are just as good as the traditional one man-one woman relationship. I believe this is a lie in most cases, due to the nature and construction of human beings.
I believe there exist certain differences between men and women that are often subtle, but very real. Living together, they tend to balance one another, help one another, heal one another, and love one another better than any other type of arrangement. This does not mean that in a few cases a different type of relationship is best, but I am speaking in general terms of what seems to work best for the great majority of people in our world.
I strongly believe that if this were not so, we would see around the world plenty of societies in which marriage is not supported or practiced much, and instead we would see much more of other living arrangements such as homosexuality or just staying single and living alone or in one’s family of origin during one’s entire lifespan.
But we do not see this very much among the thousands of human societies of every race and religion. This is not an indictment of other ways to live socially, just an observation. For this reason, I want to suggest that laws should protect, proclaim, educate and demand that the young are taught this truth, and nothing else.