Most noteworthy for me is the fact that more Americans think that porn (52%) and homosexuality (39%) are wrong than spanking children (23%) and being ultra wealthy (18%).
🤡 country
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2026/03/19/what-do-americans-consider-immoral/
this is so fucked
Wow. Does this really wanna tell me that roughly every 2nd US-american I would in the US of A is a cult-loving, children-spanking, homophobic, misogynistic silly shitstick of an excuse for a decent human being? Explains the “president”.
Did I mention: wow?
Can only hope this is some totally stupid agenda-pushing crap, and only 20 people were interviewed. In front of some church or so.
I can guarantee you the people who voted these things as being “morally wrong” only believe it’s wrong if someone else is doing it
I think hypocrisy is somehow implied with the top3 “immoralities” here.
Especially homophobia. I always had the suspicion, that the graph, that shows “volume and intensity of voicing of anti-gay-sentiment” on the x-axis, and “actually being closeted gay themselves” on the y-axis, is a very straight line in a 45° arc of both.
Actually, it’s the other way around. Gayness (the sexuality) doesn’t cause homophobia. Being homophobic causes you to have a fetish for gay stuff. These homophobic politicians being caught on grindr aren’t actually gay, they weren’t born gay. The fact that they see sex with men as wrong caused them to want it. They’re in it for the taboo.
That sounds too specific IMHO. I would say they’re born gay, but the people they surround themselves with say “gay is bad”, so they’re ashamed to come out. And to not be “caught” they fight it very loudly, so everyone can see how not gay the, are. Because only super straight guys fight the bad evil gays.
Fuck a dude just because it’s forbidden? Unless you’re somehow into guys, this would still be pretty meh.
All sex is pretty meh for conservatives. At least the men they fuck are having fun. It’s more pleasurable to fuck someone who likes your cock than someone who’s disgusted by your existence like their wives are.
Lol, OK…fair point 😂
We surveyed 3,605 U.S. adults from March 24 to 30, 2025. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP). This report also includes findings from a separate ATP survey of 8,937 U.S. adults conducted from May 5 to 11, 2025.
I have never met anyone who is a member of the “American Trends Panel”. (Or a Nielsen family for that matter). But somehow, these mysterious people with 2.5 kids and a dog represent “US Americans”.*
*As a pageant contestant once described us.
I personally know at least one family who is a Nielsen household. You’re asked to keep your participation confidential which is probably why you don’t know anyone doing it.
I did 3 years of Nielsen surveys before I moved last. I didn’t recall secrecy being pushed that hard.
Can I talk about being in a Nielsen panel or survey?
No. Once you begin participating, we ask that you do not share that you’re part of Nielsen research. We ask that you do not discuss your role with people outside of your household, including on social media websites, such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. This helps keep our research as independent as possible.
It’s been more than 9 years now. I feel like nobody cared enough to even ask.
Are they married with kids? I’ve always wondered if Nielsen ever tracks what single people watch, or college kids, or unmarried gay people. Doesn’t seem like it.
I tracked for neilson when everyone in my household was single. Me, my mother, my aunt.
It’s a retired couple with adult children who don’t live with them.
Well that explains all the NCIS spinoffs. 😉
My family was a Nielsen family for a while back in the 1990s. Our parents basically only let us watch Sesame Street and a few other PBS shows. One of my friends was sort of alarmed, almost offended by this situation, like of all the people Nielsen should be seeking data from, how could it be us?
I filled out one of their little surveys. I got paid 20 dollars or so.
Thanks for killing my hopes that it was just 20 people. I didn’t wanna read the footnotes 😁
Pew research isn’t a small organization.
I’m from a MAGA cult fake hypocrite ‘Christian’ family like this.
That I’ve had to ghost to the point they likely think I am dead, to finally stop their abuse and escape their dysfunction.
Been trying to explain the level of moral depravity of the average American for around 25 years now… most people acted like I was being hysterical, untill very recently, when we elected basically the AntiChrist, certainly a insurrectionist rapist corrupt traitor conman, twice.
Beyond 1/3 of the country openly and obviously being duplicitious anti-democracy theocrat bigots… almost everyone else just acted like that was fine, at every level of society, interpersonal to institutional, for my entire life.
We, as Americans, deserve this.
Everyone else does not.
Oh sweet (non-religious) jeez…yes, the american average numbnut probably deserves that. But the poor fucks like you, being open-minded in such a …well…that must really hurt, especially if it’s the own family that’s like that. As I always say: cut out toxicity in your life, no matter if it’s family or not. I simply couldn’t deal with such people. I only like to surround myself with people I like and respect.
So, my condolences that you have to live there AND in such a family :( And yeah “christian” is almost always synonym for “xtreme hypocrite”
Unfortunately, it’s a pretty solid methodology (speaking from experience). That said, you must understand that the average person is religious and poorly educated.
Actually quite a few of these “morals” aren’t even uniquely American, except for maybe the billionaire one. You’ll probably find an interesting mix of bad takes in most countries, even in well educated European countries. There are 8 billion people on this planet and a ton of them are just terrible.
I won’t argue with your closing sentence. Not at all. And sure, every country has a mixed bag of no-nos. But this fundamentally Christian shit is probably a usa-signature of which I’d be highly ashamed if I had to live there.
I can’t say for any European country, not even my own, but I’d guess we aren’t that horrible with “morals”. Well, at least i hope so.
I’m thinking of South American, African, Middle East and some South/South East/Central Asian countries, which is a mix of poverty and/or religious factors (for quite a variety of factors). There are countries where pornography, homosexuality, gambling, etc, are just illegal on religious morality grounds. And don’t get me started on la chancla!
As for Europe, I’m curious. I think it’d be better, on average, but a lot of the same moral roots exist there so who knows. Although I bet Finland is swell; they somehow keep being labeled the happiest county and these things are correlated, lol.
Oh sure, the combination of poverty and religion is the worst breeding ground for disturbed “morals”.
I would surely say it’s much better in EU in general. And yeah, even we Germans look up to the Nordic countries like FI, NO, S. If I could stand the languages (they just sound horrible to my ears) I would’ve emigrated long ago 😁
I also imagine some Asian countries to be much better (in the context of this discussion, not generally). Not the Islamic ones, obviously. If I could even dream of learning the language I’d be gone to China or maybe even Japan …
75% of Americans think hitting children is chill???
A ton of cultures do, unfortunately. That said, it’s also just bad parenting because (1) kids model behavior, so they will “punish” other kids physically and (2) punishment is one of the least effective forms of power, often producing public compliance but not private acceptance.
Just an fyi in case you need that in you back pocket when someone tries to argue in favor of hitting kids.
I think we should start hitting these people if they misbehave. After all they think it’s the right thing to do.
NB: This is not meant seriously, I don’t condone hitting anyone.
The vast majority of people still believe in archaic and draconic bullshit because it is “tradition”, even to the point of ignoring all scientific evidence supporting the contrary perspective.
I was visiting the head office of a California-based company that I worked for, and my colleagues (mostly left-leaning) were moaning about a proposal to make it illegal to hit children. After 15 minutes I couldn’t keep my mouth shut and said, “I think a society should protect those least able to protect themselves.” There was a lot of backpedaling, but also a few people explaining how it was totally necessary that they hit their children for reasons.
I didn’t have children at the time, but my step-daughter (now 20) and son (now 17) were never punished with violence, so it is possible for sure.
I can sort of understand the logic, even if I disagree with it:
If a child does something that could potentially have lethal consequences, a verbal warning might not be enough for them to understand the severity of what they did.
That is, of course, the only reasonable situation I can think of in which spanking is acceptable.
Verbal warnings are not less efficient than violent punishment. It’s the contrary. If the child understands why they should not do something, they respects the rule more than if they just fears the punishment. And children understand a lot of things, if explained clearly.
Also: if a child only refrains from doing something because they fear possible consequences they’ll happily do it in situations where they don’t have to be afraid of being found out. So if the only thing preventing your child from chewing on high voltage cables is the threat of violence your child will get themselves electrocuted once they’re out of your eyesight. (Yes that’s hyperbole, but you get the point.)
I dont think thats hyperbole. kids are maximally curious, and telling them not to do something without helping them understand why is basically telling them to do it. threatening violence as punishment is just saying do it when I’m not around. once the idea is in their head they will want to know why not, what would happen, and the only recourse you’ve given them to resolve their curiosity is to do exactly the thing you told them not to do. honestly I think just not mentioning it would be better than telling them dont without any justification.
I’ve never spanked my children but if you’ve never thought that spanking a child might be a good idea then you don’t have kids. Those little shits don’t understand empathy or anything else that you’re appealing to when you say violence is never the answer. Being desperate to find a solution to their behavioral problems is totally understandable.
I have children and I’d lie if I said that occasionally they make me angry, and sometimes very angry. But I’m the adult, they’re not, hitting them will teach them absolutely nothing. You won’t teach them empathy showing that you have none for them when you’re angry.
You’ve successfully described why I don’t spank them and articulated that you understand the impulse so… Thanks for agreeing with me in the weirdest way possible I guess
If you recognise the urge and haven’t followed through, I assume you wouldn’t call it “morally acceptable”, but it really sounded like you were agreeing with that position originally.
I think it’s understandable that people feel that spanking is fine and it isn’t surprising to me at all. I don’t feel the same but it’s not a shock to see that like the original comment I replied to
If that’s what you meant to say, you’re extremely bad at expressing it. After all, you wrote this:
… if you’ve never thought that spanking a child might be a good idea then you don’t have kids. Those little shits don’t understand empathy or anything else that you’re appealing to when you say violence is never the answer.
That’s exactly the opposite of the comment you were replying to. You’re not saying that parents sometimes get angry, but that they consider violence to be a solution. That’s not the same thing!
A “good idea” is not a bad impulse, it’s a good idea.
You mean children can make you mad? Yes, of course. But never ever ever have I thought this, and I would treat anyone with suspicion who does (even if they don’t act on it). Lousy parents. Poor children!
For the safety of your children, please fucking educate yourself away from this draconic perspective.
Being desperate is no excuse to abuse children.
Edit: who is the dumbass that downvoted me for saying not to abuse children? Fix yourself.
dude what??? can we ban this dude from parenthood and all fertility clinics
Ok so a third of people think voluntary assisted dying is wrong but two thirds of people think the death penalty is totally fine.
The fuck is wrong with people?
Alternate headline: “Americans objectively bad at morality across the board”
Bonus headline: “Don’t spank it, hit your kids instead”
Alternate headline: “Don’t spank it, spank your kids”
Americans objectively bad at morality across the board
Pull spanking to 100% approval and we’d get ourselves in gear
It’s the same with death as it is with milk and corpse pleasure. People think consensually drinking your partner’s breast milk is wrong, but stealing a cow’s breast milk is fine. People think eating an animal’s corpse for some family friendly fun is absolutely fine, but having sex with the corpse of your friend who signed a consent waiver before death should be a crime.
Im gonna get back to you when ive processed this.
I’m mostly asexual but I would sign a consent waiver to let a necrophile fuck My corpse if it were legal and if I knew any necrophiles.
I’m not convinced most necrophiles are as much into the whole consent thing.
People think consensually drinking your partner’s breast milk is wrong
Wait, they do? Why? What could possibly be wrong with that?
The idea of a consent waiver for post death sex is… A strange, uncomfortable thought. At the same time, I cannot really see any moral problem with that, per se. It’s kind of in the same category of being in a relationship with a sibling with no intention of getting children. Strange, slightly uncomfortable to consider, but hard to see any actual moral problem with it.
Murder animals at scale in the most horrid conditions? 4%
Watching consensual videos of naked people? 54%
Truly a moral dystopia
That is a separate issue from just eating meat in general. We are completely capable of having ethical production of meat and other animal products.
The problem isn’t the consumption of meat but the needless waste encouraged by the capitalist system that necessitates the unethical overproduction of it.
I used to agree with you, but then I went to r/vegancirclejerk and heard the classic joke “We just barbecued up the family dog for Christmas dinner. He was well loved, he had a happy and healthy life. So it’s ethical to eat him.”
Now I think the only ethical way to enjoy meat is with consent. Like in The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe.
The restaurant at the end of the universe has genetically engineered animals that want to be eaten. I don’t know if that is consent but it’s definitely unethical. Imagine genetically engineering woman to want to sleep with you. Creepy af.
The Dish of the Day is engineered not only to want to be eaten, but also to be intelligent enough to express informed, non-coerced consent. It can speak, it can understand the concept of mortality, it knows exactly how it will be cooked and which parts of its body will be used for which items on the menu. It has a complete understanding of the situation and is very happy to be eaten. If you don’t want to eat it, it will be disappointed. Nothing bad will happen to it if it does not agree to be eaten, it wants to be eaten of its own free will.
It’s an ideal ethical situation. The Dish of the Day hasn’t been coerced, abused, tricked, or taken advantage of. The only room for ethical objection is in the breeding process, but I’m inclined to trust that the breeding was more or less ethical, given the great ethics of the parts we actually see. That’s inductive reasoning, but it’s the best reasoning we have on that process.
Okay? And? I had rabbits and pigs as pets. We ate them when their time came. What’s different about it being a dog? Dogs are no more special than any other animal just because we have an arbitrary emotional attachment to them.
As long as the animal was given a good life and, when time came for slaughter, they were killed in an ethical manner then there is no moral or ethical issue.
Humans are omnivores. We eat other animals. It is no more unethical than if any animal eats another animal.
You’re right, dogs are no more special than other animals. Hearing that simile made My heart realise it’s wrong. For My head to realise it’s wrong, I had to accept that killing is usually very painful, and most humans, if given the power to kill for profit, will optimise the ethics out of the process.
I make exception for traditional Indigenous Australian hunting practices. Indigenous Australians have a social system to ensure the killing of animals is done ethically and humanely. You see, if you want to hunt an animal, you need to get permission from the person whose totem is that animal. That person considers that animal their siblings, their family. Their duty is to hold sacred knowledge about that animal and to monitor the populations. And they can’t eat their totem, because that’s cannibalism. That person has the authority to say when you can hunt their totem, and how many you can kill. They can’t profit from the killing because they can’t eat their totem. So the system has checks and balances to prevent corruption. I’m okay with meat eating within that system because it controls against the consequences.
But the white capitalist system has no controls, it just causes suffering. So I’m not okay with traditional European methods of husbandry and slaughter. I might reconsider after capitalism is overthrown.
So you agree then with my original point that the ethical question lies with the production of animal products and not with the consumption of animal products? Glad that’s settled then.
Yeah, I judge people for eating meat because it’s symbolic of support for factory farming. It’s the same as how I judge people for reading Mein Kampf (outside of an academic context), even if they pirated it.
That is an incredibly shortsighted view to blame the consumer instead of the producer. It’s incredibly lacking in class consciousness. It is in no way “symbolic support” of factory farming. People need to eat and are constrained by the society they live in. Do not blame the victims of society for needing to participate within it in order to survive. Focus your blame onto those actually doing the harm.
Reading Mein Kampf doesn’t mean you support what is said by it. It is actually beneficial to have read it so you can better understand the argument of your opposition to dismantle it when arguing against them. Again, your take on this is shortsighted and arbitrarily judgmental.
Edit: people downvoting have no understanding of the concept “no ethical consumption under capitalism”.
While you are right, it is still not possible to produce meat ethically in the quantities we need it.
We absolutely can. Ethical and sustainable practices are possible. Once workers control production, those who do the labor can choose to stop laboring if we start to become unsustainable.
People can’t consume what isn’t produced. People will make due with what is available thanks to our innate bias towards convenience. Those who desire it as to produce it themselves will already be doing so and they will only produce so much. Without the need for profit driving them, they will have no incentive to employ unethical nor unsustainable methods and do needless labor just to fulfill people’s gluttony. In a leftist society, they will produce it as they are most comfortable in doing so (from each of their ability) and the product will be equitably distributed through different systems of collective ownership as dictated by that community (to each of their need)
If they run out of meat, too bad. Laborers will tell people to wait till we can get more in an ethical and sustainable way or get to hunting it yourself, because they collectively control the land and resources from which it is produced and won’t be quick to agree to let a few individuals force them to be wasteful with those resources or labor on their behalf against their principles without good reason. The rare few who do decide to go hunt it would be statistically negligible.
If every store ran out of pork due to a mass shortage, most people wouldn’t start going try to hunt boar to eat pork. They would just get something else and deal that there is a shortage.
We absolutely can
People can’t consume what isn’t produced
?
What’s the confusion? We can produce ethically and sustainably. This is a fact.
People cannot consume what isn’t produced. This is also a separate fact.
Put them together with an understanding of logic, as explained, and you’ll see that if we control the production then we control the rate of consumption.
So you are saying we cant produce ethically with the rate of current consumption?
No. You’re flipping the logic to suggest that consumption controls the rate of production. You didn’t understand what I said at all or didn’t read it.
I’m saying that with the current system which dictates the incentives behind production is causing us to over produce through unethical and unsustainable methods and people are simply consuming what is available, because people need to eat and they can only eat what has been produced. That is a physical, material limit of life. If society was restructured to where the workers owned the means of production and the profit incentive was done away with then the rate of consumption would logically have to be lower as a result, because people physically cannot consume what isn’t produced.
I’ve actually heard several different women try to argue that if a man even just looks at pornography it somehow counts as “cheating”. They were all quite upset when no one agreed with them but seemed unwilling to change their opinion. They did not appreciate my laughter but in all fairness I genuinely thought they were trying to make a joke
I had a gf like this, caught me looking at the fappening pics. Said I was cheating… Bout 3 months later I found out she’d been taking dick from 2 different dudes for more than a year. People will do anything to feel superior to others.
People have different comfort levels with these things. If some women don’t want their partner watching porn, that’s fine, we shouldn’t mock them for that. Of course if their partner disagrees with this stance they are free to try and persuade or leave or whatever. But that’s a personal issue for them to sort out
Edit: you guys are literally downvoting me for saying women are allowed to have preferences
We really should mock it because that is a toxic and controlling behavior which shows a lack of emotional maturity.
You’re being downvoted for enabling and making excuses for toxic behavior by trying to mask it as a simple preference like preferring blonde over brunette.
By this logic you could say all monogamous relationships are toxic. As long as both parties are consenting participants to the arrangement then I don’t see what the issue is
Personally, I do believe monogamy is toxic by being an extension of centuries of toxic cultures having influenced human society conditioning us against polyamory. Humans historically practiced polygamy until arbitrary religious and socioeconomic beliefs began to influence our society, teaching us to be ashamed of our natural behaviors.
But that is much deeper issue with society at large which is neither here nor there.
If someone doesn’t like their partner doing something that is harmless and not affecting them in the slightest, then they need to practice some introspection into why the actions of others that do not directly affect them or harm anyone else bothers them so much and sort that out for themselves to become emotionally mature instead of trying to control the behaviors of others.
Also, my logic makes allowance for monogamy. In a monogamous relationship, going outside of it as one would in a poly relationship comes with the risk of STDs, which directly affects the other partner, so it makes it their business who their partner sleeps with to be able to have informed consent if they want to continue being in a sexual relationship with the individual.
Yeah they can have their stance. Good luck finding a partner, but there is nothing wrong with the belief.
In some cultures this would not be a niche belief and it will be easier to find a partner that shares these values
Upon consideration, I wish everyone well. I hope any such person finds their person if they look, and I hope they make each other happy.
Turned off by couple of the comments
Regardless of whether it happened, the idea of laughing at someone for such a boring* opinion… one can use their words and tell the person you find it difficult not to perceive their statement as absurd (which is why you probably want to know a bit more and ask about their logic, or you’ve already moved on to a new subject or person).
*Maybe if they talk about, say, lizard people laughing would be expected?
Apparently there are a lot of SWERFs (Sex Work Exclusionary Radical Feminists)
AKA fake feminists
It isn’t just swerfs, it’s mostly just insecure people
Haah. What if you watch porn together. Does that count as an orgy?
More people thinking homosexuality is wrong than the fucking death penalty…
…or eating meat ! it’s mindblowing
edit looks like 4 people among us think homosexuality is worse than eating meat
It makes sense that in the country were Death Penalty is considered less morally wrong than Viewing Pornography or Homosexuality, most people support (or at least don’t care about) Israel mass murdering children for the “crime” of being born Palestinian.
That moral priority alone says that for most Americans, life is less sacred than what people do with their sexy bits alone or with consenting adults.
No wonder America keeps making war and killing millions.
Prudism is a blight that rots the fabric of society.
Prudism by itself whilst bad isn’t all that bad.
No, the Evil part is the Love For Ending The Life Of Other People.
Prudism alongside this is just hypocrisy - after all, unless one is reading a very, very special Bible, Christ said “Turn the other cheek”, not “Hang them by their neck until they’re dead”.
yeah prudism is that bad. its not as if these people are content to be uncomfortable with sex in their own life and leave it at that, they have to force their beliefs on everyone else too. no one has any right to control the consensual relationships of anyone else, but these cunts feel like they do.
No it’s pretty fucking bad and mentally damaging. That’s how you end up with sexually repressed lunatics who lash out because they lack the emotional maturity to handle their biological urges.
the palestine/gaza conflict has been going on for decades, it dint affect people at the voting polls since the past few elections, even the bush wars wernt even quesitoned that much by the public. likely due to copaganda/military propaganda shows and movies.
Most nuanced take, clearly based upon a deep understanding of American culture and politics. We are all just bad people who love war and genocide. There isn’t one party that gave all the power to check the president away and let him do whatever he wants, and there aren’t protests with millions of people regularly happening because we all love it.
Last I checked Ds and Rs support Israeli genocide. Or if its too recent for you just rewind and you will find obama droning down whole wedding parties because someone didnt support US hegemony (aka was a “terrorist”). Of course Bush committed war crimes all throughout the Middle East too. Voting Blue harder isn’t going to fix your problems
Spare me the “American-style simpleton-politics for people who have no clue how real Democracy looks like” bullshit - the last guy which was of the “other side” in your hyper-reductive 2D fake-democracy theater system was sending 2000 lb bombs (which the American Military itself won’t use because of their high collateral damage) to Israel to blow up high density neighborhoods of residential apartment buildings with.
There were no big demonstrations against it.
Same thing back when Obama was blowing up weddings and killed so many innocents that he changed the definition of “enemy” to be any male between the ages of 14 and 60 so that the numbers didn’t look so bad.
There were no big demonstrations against it either. Hell, plenty of American mindless tribalist followers of that “side” of America’s Theatrical “Democracy” still laud Obama as a great man and a great president.
The reason why there are big demonstrations against the current one is that he’s doing in America the shit that the others mainly did or supported abroad, so now people who weren’t suffering when Biden’s 2000lb bombs were hitting Hospitals in Gaza and Obama’s drones were blowing up families attending weddings, are suffering, so its only now that they demonstrate,
Little brown kids being mass murdered was fine for most Americans as long as they themselves were ok.
America is a country were “I’m alright Jack” is the most important “Moral” “compass” for most people, possibly one of the worst in that regard.
Democrat party agress with republicn party on like 90% of bills, you just only hear about the 10% they pretend to fight about
Imagine being this much of a ninny
2/3 think being extremely rich is not a moral issue,
and almost 2/3 think homosexuality is.40% is closer to 1/3 than 2/3, but your point still stands. The fact that 40 think homosexuality is morally wrong is nuts. It’s that damn religion thing.
I wasn’t talking about the “morally wrong” statistic.
Only 37% rightfully think it’s not a question of morality at all (because WHY WOULD IT BE? It’s not a choice you can make!).
So 63% think it is a question of morals, which is what I meant by “almost 2/3”.Appreciate your clarification, and I probably agree with you.
I mean, some people think that pineapple on pizza is morally wrong. 😉
This stood out to me as well. We might be fucked
It’s almost as if the country that was settled by all the outcast religious weirdos from Europe, somehow ended up with twisted religious morals.
Now, my ancestors were horse thieves, and not particularly religious.
Porn ranks higher than abortion? What?
Thinking contraception is moraly wrong ranks higher than being a vegetarian. The whole thing is bonkers.
Not surprised considering the roots of American culture stem from the Puritanism and Protestantism; those roots run DEEP
Yeah I ha e no idea.
I don’t think either are fundamentally immoral, but I can conceive of a greater number of scenarios where the creation of pornography, and therefore its consumption, would be wrong. Actors who are coerced into porn, or who later regret their appearance but can’t withdraw consent. Porn industry taking advantage of underage or underprivileged people. Pornography addiction, or using porn to avoid coping with real world interpersonal issues. Those are just off the top of my head.
Again, I don’t think porn should be illegal, not by a long shot, but it’s got a few more entanglements that I might take issue with than abortion, which 9999 times out of 10,000 should be nothing more than a conversation between a patient and their doctor.
All of the things you mention are of course horrible. None of them are pornography.
The US population has some messed up opinions
When I’m her death, and suffering intolerably, it’s immoral for me to check out 2 weeks early? They’d rather see me continue suffering
A fetus has a genetic abnormality that will ensure the child will suffer for years and then die a horrible death? Sorry, abortion is morally wrong! The baby will have to suffer!
Come to think of it, most of these fucked up opinions are religion driven. Imaginary Jeebus said it was wrong, so that settles it!
Can’t afford a baby? Doesn’t matter, the baby must be born, it would be immoral to abort. Once the baby is born, though, fuck that baby, we don’t care, we won’t help you raise it you slut, you should have controlled those sinful urges!
The US is such a fucked up place
Would be interesting to see a comparison with other countries. Here in Sweden, it’s illegal to spank children, and most people are OK with that, AFAIK. Abortion is also not frowned upon in any way. We would have wildly different results on this chart.
How hard is it to immigrate to Sweden (coming from the US)?
If you can get a job beforehand, not that difficult I think. I’m no expert in these matters though. However, over on Reddit there’s a whole subreddit dedicated to it. Lots of good info there: https://www.reddit.com/r/TillSverige/
I honestly didn’t realize that beating children was still so popular.
I realized some years ago that most Americans view “morality” as almost exclusively being about sex. Raising moral concerns about things like having a job where you build missiles to be dropped on schools is likely to be met not so much with disagreement as confusion, about how that could possibly be a moral issue if it’s both legal and doesn’t involve your genitals.
Religious people went on about “morality” as a way to groom people into sexual.shame, and then exploit it to control them. This country’s eaders don’t know.the first thing about real morality
“Religious” and its a protestant megachurch
Worst thing that happened to America was allowing the Puritans to leave in the first place. Should have just offed them all and nipped it in the bud. Would’ve saved a lot more lives
