Democrats are suggesting JD Vance is personally weird.
He’s not. He is happily married. He has kids. He regularly attends church. There’s nothing about JD Vance that screams “weird.”
Democrats are saying he’s weird because he believes weird things. They cite his comment in 2021, when he stated, “We are effectively run in this country via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too. That is a basic fact. Look at Kamala Harris, AOC, and the like; the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children. How does it make any sense that we’ve turned our country over to people who don’t have a direct stake in it?”
The argument I think he should have been making is that it is very important in society to have kids. It is a morally superior decision to have kids. It is.
We can pretend that it is a matter of complete apathy as to whether human beings have children. But all of social development, all of human survival, relies on people having children.
If we have a choice as a society whether to promote childbearing and child-rearing or whether to not promote it, that is not a matter of apathy in the slightest.
Now, three years later, Vance has explained himself, saying, “This comment that I made was actually motivated in part by a conversation I had with my wife where she at the time had two babies. We hadn’t yet had a third, and she was talking about how she felt this incredible professional pressure to not have kids because it’s set back her professional advancement. And what a weird society that we’ve set up where moms who want to work, the thought that a lot of them are having is, ‘I can’t have more babies because it’s going to be bad for my career.’ How about we make the workplace more accommodating to working moms and working dads so that we can promote a real culture of life?”
The reason Democrats are targeting Vance as weird is that they don’t want Republicans painting Kamala Harris as weird.
This is a dog that is not going to hunt particularly well, even though the media is parroting the charge against Vance in unison.
WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show
The Democratic media complex rides again; they are all in coordination. And you can sense the joie de vivre in the media. They’re back to eating cartons of ice cream and making fun of Vance, their favorite thing to do.
They’re going to try and say that if you point out that Harris is weird on policy and also weird personally, that means you are racist and sexist, that the actual weirdo is the perfectly normal guy from Ohio who’s married with kids, goes to a Catholic church, and believes in traditional family values.
What is actually weird is believing that the choice of having children versus the choice of not having children are morally equivalent. They are not. Or that those choices are societally equivalent in terms of their benefit to society. They are not.
All functioning societies are rooted in a traditional family structure that is built around having kids.
That is utterly uncontroversial, as proven by our priors. Every society is rooted in the little platoons represented by families, and those families have to be built for the future — or the society doesn’t have a future.
The alternative perspective, which believes that all personal choice is not a matter of social impact or morality, is a peculiarly Western-educated, post-Christian idea.
And that’s weird.
[#item_full_content]
[[{“value”:”
Democrats are suggesting JD Vance is personally weird.
He’s not. He is happily married. He has kids. He regularly attends church. There’s nothing about JD Vance that screams “weird.”
Democrats are saying he’s weird because he believes weird things. They cite his comment in 2021, when he stated, “We are effectively run in this country via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too. That is a basic fact. Look at Kamala Harris, AOC, and the like; the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children. How does it make any sense that we’ve turned our country over to people who don’t have a direct stake in it?”
The argument I think he should have been making is that it is very important in society to have kids. It is a morally superior decision to have kids. It is.
We can pretend that it is a matter of complete apathy as to whether human beings have children. But all of social development, all of human survival, relies on people having children.
If we have a choice as a society whether to promote childbearing and child-rearing or whether to not promote it, that is not a matter of apathy in the slightest.
Now, three years later, Vance has explained himself, saying, “This comment that I made was actually motivated in part by a conversation I had with my wife where she at the time had two babies. We hadn’t yet had a third, and she was talking about how she felt this incredible professional pressure to not have kids because it’s set back her professional advancement. And what a weird society that we’ve set up where moms who want to work, the thought that a lot of them are having is, ‘I can’t have more babies because it’s going to be bad for my career.’ How about we make the workplace more accommodating to working moms and working dads so that we can promote a real culture of life?”
The reason Democrats are targeting Vance as weird is that they don’t want Republicans painting Kamala Harris as weird.
This is a dog that is not going to hunt particularly well, even though the media is parroting the charge against Vance in unison.
WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show
The Democratic media complex rides again; they are all in coordination. And you can sense the joie de vivre in the media. They’re back to eating cartons of ice cream and making fun of Vance, their favorite thing to do.
They’re going to try and say that if you point out that Harris is weird on policy and also weird personally, that means you are racist and sexist, that the actual weirdo is the perfectly normal guy from Ohio who’s married with kids, goes to a Catholic church, and believes in traditional family values.
What is actually weird is believing that the choice of having children versus the choice of not having children are morally equivalent. They are not. Or that those choices are societally equivalent in terms of their benefit to society. They are not.
All functioning societies are rooted in a traditional family structure that is built around having kids.
That is utterly uncontroversial, as proven by our priors. Every society is rooted in the little platoons represented by families, and those families have to be built for the future — or the society doesn’t have a future.
The alternative perspective, which believes that all personal choice is not a matter of social impact or morality, is a peculiarly Western-educated, post-Christian idea.
And that’s weird.
“}]]
