this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
111 points (100.0% liked)

politics

31167 readers
2147 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/41275360

Before his death, Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was a perfect example of these damaging ideas. He hyped the idea that having “a ton of children” is inherently virtuous, at least for white people. (He was less happy about Black people having a lot of kids.) But Kirk also argued that people should “get married young and have more kids than they can afford” — a message that was no doubt pleasing to his old-fashioned GOP donors who want their daughters to give up their careers and move back to their parents’ suburban neighborhoods. But for actual families, it’s a bad idea, especially as Republicans like Kirk want to simultaneously gut public education and social spending. Growing up in poverty isn’t fun or romantic. It’s stressful and leads to long-term problems for a lot of kids.

From Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth bragging about his seven kids to Vice President JD Vance gloating about his fourth that is on the way, the idea that having a big family is the same as having a happy family is ubiquitous on the right.

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LordR@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

They generally love people without empathy. And people without empathy are generally bad dads too.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 13 points 7 months ago

Men not being raised to aspire to be good fathers is 95% of why the far right exists in the first place.

[–] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

A whole article about right wingers being obsessed with having kids, and no mention of the quiverfull movement?

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I have a big family and cannot understand thinking everyone else in the world needs to do the same thing to make me feel ok about it. Like, how insecure do you have to be to need that? Can't you just do what you want to because it's your preference without needing it to be the only 'right' way? Just because something is good for me doesn't mean it's good for everyone, and it's a good thing, too. I figured the only reason I even can have many is because others have none.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I hate it, but it's not a bad way to crowd out the competition over time, Idiocracy style.

[–] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I don't suppose there's any other motive they might have for trying to increase the supply of neglected children.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

They love themselves because nobody else does.