What Happened to Family Values?

Life Audio.

On today's episode of Timeless Wisdom, today's subject is family values.

What are they? There may not be a term that is more widely used without a definition than family values. I, I hear the term all the time, and it is used to bash people. It is used to to defend people, but I never know, and I'll bet most of you don't know what it means.

The family values, what they really are, is, uh, it's the political power or political authority emanating from the family. That's what I— that's— anytime anyone usurps authority from the family to make political decisions, basically you're destroying family values.

That's coming up on Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager.

We live in a time where the moment you question the narrative, you're told to stop thinking and start complying. That's why what Angel is doing matters. With eye-opening documentaries like Thank You, Dr. Fauci and RFK: Legacy, Angel is willing to explore the issues others avoid. In a culture shaped by gatekeepers, Angel offers something rare: a platform for truth-seeking storytelling that isn't constrained by fear or conformity. Go to angel.com/prager, join the Angel Guild, and watch these films today.

Welcome to Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager. Hear thousands of hours of Dennis's lectures, courses, and classic radio programs. And to purchase Dennis Prager's Rational Bibles, go to dennisprager.com.

And hello and welcome to the Ultimate Issues Hour on the Dennis Prager Show. Every week, this hour I devote to to some ultimate issue, some great question of life, to clarify life for you and for me. That is my ultimate objective in any event with my show. I'm Dennis Prager, and thank you for joining me. And today's subject is family values. What are they? There may not be a term that is more widely used without a definition than family values. I hear the term all the time, and it is used to bash people, it is used to defend people, but I never know, and I'll bet most of you don't know what it means. In fact, I'd be very interested. Call in immediately, 1-800-PRAGER-776. And it has to be immediately because I can't take much time here. 1-800-PRAGER-776. And that would be 877-243-7776. I wanna know, what do you understand by family values? The term is bandied about by politicians all the time, and frankly, I never, I never know what people are talking about. It fascinates me to hear this, and you hear, oh, this guy's a hypocrite because he divorced, so he can't possibly be an advocate of family values. This guy's a hypocrite because he had an infidelity. He can't possibly believe in family values. And we believe in family values. We are for— we who are for same-sex marriage, we are for family values. Just our family is a different form of family. So what does it mean? What does it mean that you believe in the family? And what does that mean that you believe in the family as opposed to what? To non-family? So because of the factor that I want to talk about what I understand it to be, I am just gonna do a risky thing here and take calls even before Eva has a chance now— you don't like that idea Alan! Alan is looking nauseous at this time so what I will do for you is have a musical interlude while I wait for you da-da-dum dee-dee dum dee-dee dee dum dee-dee din dee-dee din dee-dee dee dee deee Uh, because, you know, Eva does have long discussions often, Alan, so I, I can put in a very difficult position here. So you want me to do my idea or not? Uh, let's see, let's, uh, all right, we got one up already. Let's go to, uh, Mary. Mary in Castle Rock, Colorado. Uh, what do you, uh, what do you define, what do you think family values means?

In my mind, I'm thinking family values you know, pertains to anything that supports or encourages marriage between a husband and a wife, and, uh, and relationships between a parent and child.

Good, that's very good. Now, that, that's so anything that encourages husband-wife-based family, right?

Right, anything that supports and, um You know, anything that supports and encourages relationships between a husband and a wife and between the children and the parents.

Can a person believe in family values and divorce?

Um, well, I guess there are certain conditions where divorce would be acceptable.

Okay, so it is possible for one to be an advocate of it and, and divorce.

Well, for example, if there's abuse, you know, that's not— that would not be a family value.

Yeah, no, no, you don't even have to give examples. So long as you accept that fact, that's all— that's really all I needed to know from you. Okay, since she pretty much has hit the nail on the head, I would like to know if anybody has a broader definition, and you folks can call in. So let me now talk about it, because frankly, she really did on the first shot. And, uh, say it as I understand it, family values. Now here is where you have a left-right divide, my friends. Family values as, as understood by whom is the question. As understood by me may well be different as understood by Planned Parenthood or by GLBT, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered folk and their, and their spokesmen. But my understanding of family values is that exactly, pretty much as she put it, which encourages a husband-wife-based family unit. That's a family value. Now, why is that good? I will get into that. Why, why is that good? It's not self-evident that it's good because people will say that any unit of people who love one another is a good one, so long as there is love. And that is, that is the way people will, will differ with me. Let's go to Tampa, Florida, and Reese. Hello, Reese. Dennis Prager.

Hey, I just wanted to say real quick that I think family values, I think, has, has, I look at it in relationship to the government. The The family values, what they really are, is, uh, it's the political power or political authority emanating from the family. That's what I— that's what— anytime the, the anyone usurps, uh, authority from the family to make political decisions, basically you're, you're, you're destroying family values.

So, so the family—

that's how I look at it.

The family should be the most powerful unit in society.

I— yeah, I mean, governing individual behavior, I believe.

Okay, fair enough. I thank you for that. Okay, I will leave it at my definition for now, and that is that which encourages— I want you to understand this because there will be challenges to the right and to the left here— that which encourages and supports a husband-wife-based unit. That means a lot of things. Number one, to give you an idea of how, uh, in— endangered this is, number one, it means that one advocates measures that will pro— promote marriage. That's the obvious. You have to start there. You start with marriage. Marriage between a man and a woman is the first family value. Now, here you— now please understand, when you want to understand why are family values under siege, you just begin with number one and you realize how much under siege. It is under siege from two, from two quarters. One is from those who believe that it need not be in any way a man and a woman. Two men and two women are just as fine for a family value. It is under siege by those who believe that marriage itself is not necessary. And that is the dominant view in Europe. The woman who just ran for president of France, Ségolène Royal, was not married and has 4 kids— is not married and has 4 kids. She is living with her partner, I guess that's the word one would use, for, I don't know, 25 years or whatever, and they have 4 children. And it never even arose as an issue in France that she was not married. In the United States, it is inconceivable that somebody not married with 4 children and, and, and living with the man of the— who is the father of those children could run for President of the United States. You could run for mayor of Berkeley, you could run for senator from California for that matter, or from Massachusetts, but you could not run for President of the United States. So number one, number one in family values is marriage. Marriage between a man and a woman. Now, why not between two men? That will take another, another Ultimate Issues Hour, Alan, where we should talk about the heterosexual ideal as its own subject for an Ultimate Issues Hour. Why, in the final analysis, is it better for society and for the individual, if possible— and I add those words very strongly, if possible— for a man and a woman to bond rather than two men or two women. But for the sake of the notion of family values, those of us who believe in family values as understood by the majority, but not, but not anywhere near all Americans, believe that it is best for a child to at least begin life with a married man and woman raising this child. They may be adoptive, they may be blood, but it is an— a husband and wife who are together raising this child. That is the ideal. That is, that is the, the first family value. Now, does that allow for divorce? We will talk about divorce. Does that allow for the same-sex marital unit? We will talk about that. Does that allow for people who are not married and raising children but are still of opposite sex. We will talk about that. But number one in family values, when the term is used, because it is never defined, and that's what I'm doing this Ultimate Issues Hour, is that a man and a woman marry and hopefully begin a family. We continue. 1-800-PRAGER-776. This is the Dennis Prager Show.

This episode of Timeless Wisdom will continue right after this.

We live in a time where the moment you question the narrative, you're told to stop thinking and start complying. That's why what Angel is doing matters. With eye-opening documentaries like Thank You, Dr. Fauci and RFK: Legacy, Angel is willing to explore the issues others avoid. In a culture shaped by gatekeepers, Angel offers something rare: a platform for truth-seeking storytelling that isn't constrained by fear or conformity. Go to Angel.com/prager, join the Angel Guild, and watch these films today.

Now back to more of Dennis Prager's Timeless Wisdom.

For all the talk about family values, I have never heard them defined. I thought that that might be helpful if we're going to actually ever discuss the issue or use the term. Hi, I'm Dennis Prager, and this is the Ultimate Issues Hour on my show, an hour each week devoted to some great issue of life. Doesn't get much greater than the issue of family values. What are they? And my understanding is that the, the primary— the first definition is that a man and a woman marry. So immediately you realize why family values is going to be a controversial term in America today, because there are many Americans who believe that it doesn't matter if it's a man and a woman. It could be a man and a man and a woman, or a woman and a woman. So family values immediately is different for, for people who are religious and people who are not, and people— or in most cases— and for people who are conservative and people who are liberal, though most liberals still believe that marriage should be a man and a woman. I mean, we cannot We cannot deny that, and it shouldn't be denied. All right, so we begin with that. Then we— then that's— that is the beginning. But that also involves— and this shows you how difficult the concept is— it also involves encouraging marriage. But we live in a world, in the Western world, where marriage is passé for many. Why do I need that commitment, that paper, that thing which may lead to divorce proceedings? Let's just live together. As the French presidential candidate just did. Live together with her man, the father of her children, and nobody cared. She ran for president of France, Ségolène Royal. All right, let's go to more of your calls here, and we begin with Carson, California. Michael, Michael, Dennis Prager, thank you for calling.

Yes, you just, you just said something that sort of exposes what I think is hypocrisy on the right. You said that no one could run for president and not be married to the mother or father of their children. Excuse me, Ronald Reagan ran for president. He was not married to the mother of all of his children. Robert Dole was not married to the mother of his children when he ran for president. Rudolph Giuliani is not married to the mother of his children.

Yeah, okay, alright. Either I was not clear, or you misunderstood, or you are using terms that you know I'm not referring to. I'm talking to about people who never marry in the first place, not to people who divorce and remarry. Okay, the example I gave, Michael, shows that either you are misinterpreting or trying to mislead my audience, because I use the example of the French presidential candidate who was not married ever to the father of her children.

But interestingly enough, she had a far more long-term relationship with her partner.

It's not my point. I didn't use duration as a value. I said that it would be impossible in this country to run for president if you had never married the person you are living with, even if you didn't have children. It— the issue of children is secondary to the fact that we want people who are living with someone to be married to that person.

Well, that isn't what you said, but—

It is what I said, because that's why I gave the French presidential candidate's example. Otherwise, Americans could never vote for someone who was divorced and remarried.

Right, but they clearly have done so, because— Yes, we understand that things are not as simple as the right wants to say. It wants to talk the talk but not walk the walk. Do as I say, not as I do.

Well, what is it that the right says and doesn't do? It doesn't— what did Ronald Reagan say and not do? I will wait until you talk. He hung up. It's such a moronic call, it makes me angry. This is so typical. The right is hypocritical, and then I ask, okay, what did Ronald Reagan say that he didn't do? What walk did he not walk compared to the talk that he talked? And he hangs up. Now, I will say that there are people on the right who feed this notion by arguing that if you're divorced, you are undermining family values. The family value— that's why it's important to define this for everybody. Divorce is a tragedy, but the engagement— engaging in it doesn't mean you don't believe in family values. You might as well say that somebody who is widowed and is married to someone who is not the parent of their children is not engaged in family values, right? What if I am widowed and I marry a widow? And we both have children, then we are both married to people who are not the parents of, of, of our children. Are we undermining family values? The, the— those who wish to loathe the right will say yes. Those who have integrity will understand that you are in fact increasing family values because you have decided to give both of the sets of children a home with two parents. That's the aim. The aim is to provide a home with a mother and father. That is a family value. Is it ideal that you never divorce? That is the ideal. There are many ideals in life. I am acknowledging, and I don't know— well, I can't say I don't know anyone on the right who doesn't acknowledge the messiness of life, but By and large, people do. There are people on the right who believe that divorce is always wrong, and that, that, that, by the way, I have acknowledged, is one of the handful, or in fact may be the only direct value wherein traditional Christian teaching and traditional Jewish teaching differ on a value. They differ on theology, obviously, hugely, but that's a separate issue. I don't, I don't talk about theological differences, I talk about values differences. Judaism has always allowed divorce, and Christianity has not always allowed divorce, and many Christians to this day don't. 1-800-PRAGER-776. And let's go to San Francisco, California. Scott, hello Scott, Dennis Prager.

Hi, I just wanted to try to give you a quick sort of chronology of what happened to the term family values as I remember it. In the '90s, especially in the '92 and '96 elections, it was a big sort of buzzword concept. And I remember, you know, watching TV and watching the politicians talk about it, and every time they were asked, their talking points was, you know, when they were asked, "What is your position on family values?" they would say the same exact thing, which was, "Different families have different values." And that became like this parroted, sort of broken record sounding kind of thing, "Different families have different values," over and over and over again. That's all they ever said. And essentially what the left did, which is what they always do, was they hijacked the term and made it irrelevant. Um, which is why I think in 2007 you can have this question that you're having, which is, I don't know what it means. Um, the reason you don't know what it means is because it essentially means nothing. It means if—

no, I do know, right?

If my family has a mother and 6 fathers, then those are my family.

That's correct. You're right. He's right about that. The only— uh, it is clear to me. I don't know if you implied that it wasn't, but it is. But he's right. That, that it's come to mean nothing except to batter Republicans.

This episode of Timeless Wisdom will continue right after this.

We live in a time where the moment you question the narrative, you're told to stop thinking and start complying. That's why what Angel is doing matters. With eye-opening documentaries like Thank You, Dr. Fauci and RFK: Legacy. Angel is willing to explore the issues others avoid. In a culture shaped by gatekeepers, Angel offers something rare: a platform for truth-seeking storytelling that isn't constrained by fear or conformity. Go to angel.com/prager, join the Angel Guild, and watch these films today.

Now back to more of Dennis Prager's Timeless Wisdom.

And hello everybody and welcome back. This is the hour called the Ultimate Issues Hour on the Dennis Prager Show.

Dennis Prager.

Each week I discuss some great issue of life, and today I'm trying to define family values. And I realize it has come— I think the last caller had a good point, and I have given a definition, but of course my definition is unacceptable to many Americans on the cultural left. The understanding of family values that, that, that was its original intent was a man and a woman marrying and forming a family, that that is the ideal, that it is the ideal that children be raised by a married man and woman. It has been so under siege because of the man and woman part and because of the marriage part. So many people just thinking it's not necessary to get married. So it's, it's, it's— I don't even know if it's a term used any longer. It's It's the only time I see it used now is to bash a Republican who had a divorce or an extramarital affair. I never see the term almost. I don't even know if Republicans use the term anymore. It's worth looking in the, in a Republican, what do you call it, their platform. I don't even know if it's used. It's now a battering ram, but that's what it means, and that value to me is important. Okay, let's go to Parker in Phoenix, Arizona. Parker, Dennis Prager, thank you for calling.

Hi Dennis, I'm a big fan of your show.

Thank you. How old are you?

Um, I'm 17.

Good to hear from you.

It's good to hear from you. Um, I was calling in response to a caller you had, um, like I think about 10 minutes ago talking about divorce.

Yes.

Um, as a Christian, and this is where we probably disagree a little bit, but I, um, strongly feel that it is in the Bible. If you read Paul's letters, again, which is not in the, in, um, the Jewish Bible, but Paul's letters clearly, um, well, and Jesus himself say that divorce is never acceptable, that if your spouse is unfaithful, you may for a time be, um, be separated, but it does say that you should faithfully seek your spouse back. So that they may be faithful to you again.

Right. The irony here is that I agree with the fact that, uh, if your spouse is unfaithful, that should never automatically mean a divorce. I, I strongly, strongly advocate that. I beg people to be forgiving unless it's, it's a person who does it, uh, uh, serially. In other words, this is a regular habit, or has done it in a way to humiliate. The humiliation to me would be worse than the actual affair even. But in any event, I agree with that, but you're right, Parker. This is, as I said earlier, and it's a delight to hear from you, this is— and you know my motto, I prefer clarity to agreement— overwhelmingly, there are such a thing, there was such a thing as Judeo-Christian values. I am a huge advocate of them. Huge. I'm one of the biggest. I wrote 24 columns advocating Judeo-Christian values a couple of years ago. Go to prageradio.com, see my columns, and you will have that. Nevertheless, there is, there is one value difference that I can speak of. There are— again, I separate values from theology. There are huge theological differences or they'd be the same religion. And that is on divorce. Whereas the Jewish teaching— I mean, there is a rabbi who wrote a book which I think Christians would find almost incomprehensible. And that is called "Divorce is a Mitzvah." I mean, it is an astonishing book, and he takes that quote from the great medieval rabbinic teacher Rashi. Now, of course, it doesn't mean— mitzvah means good deed or commandment— it's not that Jews aren't commanded to divorce, but Jews are allowed to, and the Hebrew Bible allows for it. I won't go further than that except to say that that would be a values difference between the two religions. Alright, now let's go to more calls. St. Paul, Minnesota, and Bernie. Hello Bernie, Dennis Prager.

Hi Dennis. Hi. Uh, I'm a conservative, I vote Republican, but I cannot be a Republican because I do not subscribe to the entire Republican platform. I can remember about 20 years ago—

Wait, I'm sorry, you vote Republican but you cannot be a Republican?

Oh, I can't belong to the Republican Party. Republican Party because it requires that you subscribe to every item on the platform.

What, what, where, where do you, where do you, why do you believe that?

Okay, maybe I'm wrong.

Okay, I'm becoming confused. You're easygoing. Alright, maybe I'm wrong. Go on.

Uh, okay. I remember about 20 years ago I attended a caucus of the Republican Party.

Ah, you'll have to continue that in a moment. I don't want to break that story. We continue. What are family values is the subject of this Ultimate Issues Hour. On the Dennis Prager Show. Well, the term is used a lot, but I'm not sure that anybody knows what it means, certainly anymore. I'll tell you what family values has meant to me and what I think it meant to those who used the term originally: that which encourages marriage, that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that man and woman have children, whether adopted or through birth, and that the, the, that unit is the, is the foundational unit of society— a man and a woman married raising children. There will be variations on that theme, but that is, that is what family values, as I have understood them, has meant. Today, as one of my callers noted, it means nothing anymore because it means any, any group that is, that lives together is a family. Could be, could be 4 women and kids not related to any of them, or what have you. Now, I fully understand that there will be examples, as I said, where there won't be the, that specific ideal— divorce, widowhood, bringing in other children Well, no, that bringing in other children would not, would not, would not be a variation. Okay, now Bernie, you were about to tell us quickly a story in St. Paul. Go ahead.

Yeah. Yes, well, as I said, I attended the Republican caucus, you know, and as a person interested in general semantics and etymology, it rapidly became evident to me that this was a code word that they were using in order to avoid verbalizing its meaning. But what they meant at that time was, one, that you're anti-abortion and that you would not allow abortion under any other condition. And two, uh, it was, uh, to keep marriage, uh, one man, one woman, and not corrupting it by having same-sex marriage. Those were the two general tenets that that I saw. I saw people get up on the stage, and if they didn't subscribe to this—

good people—

they were thrown out and not allowed to run.

Okay, all right. Whether that's true or not, I think that's— I know for a fact that there have been pro-choice Republicans, or at least not Republicans who are not pro-life, that have gone very far. And I've been in fact begging Republicans who have very strong feelings about abortion not to allow that to stop them from voting for a Republican like Rudy Giuliani. On earth, as opposed to in heaven, we make compromises where we have the better, not the best. In any event, presidents' effects on abortion are minimal. We've had pro-life presidents and it hasn't done a darn thing with regard, by and large, to regard to abortion in the United States. What we need to do, and we are doing, is making the values argument against abortion and telling women who are pregnant, girls who are pregnant, you have the capacity, if you don't want this child, you have the capacity to do more good than almost any human on earth can do, and that is bring this child to term and give it parents who will adopt it. I just— it blows my mind that that is not told to every girl and every woman who is pregnant and doesn't want to want to give birth. The amount of good that a, that a, a pregnant woman can do who gives the child up for adoption, the amount of good that she can do dwarfs the amount of good most of us will do in a whole lifetime. But nobody talks about that. That's a family value as far as I know, and it is the quintessential family value, in fact. All righty, and let's go to Uh, River Falls, River Falls, Wisconsin, and Belinda. Hi, Belinda. Dennis Prager.

Hi, Dennis. What an honor.

Thank you.

Um, I'm nervous. I hope I can, I can make this sound sensical, but, um, I, I think a big part of family values and, and the loss of it is the fact that, like, like your example of a pregnant girl, we, we've gone from a society of family values where you do for others as a family unit, unit, you did things to better the unit, not yourself. And I think we're getting more towards you can do it, it's all about you, the world's your oyster. It's almost this feeling of selfishness. And I think that's why in France nobody really batted an eye about a woman who didn't have a marriage, you know, to a man who raised the family because it's more about what she did for herself. Does that make sense?

Yeah, yeah. Well, that's the general view. The general view is why make any bond that is, that implies permanence. If I want to get out, I want to get out. I don't owe society anything. I— what is— what feels good to me, I'll do. And it feels good to me not to marry. One reason to marry is in fact for the sake of society. It's an announcement to society that I am taking responsibility for this person. That is a very, very big factor in, in marriage. That it is a social good and therefore one does it. But that— you're right, I mean, the, the age of narcissism inaugurated in the '60s and '70s, it's called a very idealistic age. And if you consider narcissism a form of idealism, it was indeed a very idealistic age. Alrighty, and so thank you, Belinda. And let's go to John in Cheltenham, Pennsylvania. Hello, John. Dennis Prager.

Dennis, I can't applaud loud enough for all that you have done to promote good relations between Christians and Jews. Thank you. And by the way, I think the previous caller was talking about extreme individualism. The Pope has written extensively about that.

Mm-hmm.

The reason I called was in relation to your understanding of Christianity and divorce, especially as it might involve the teachings of the Catholic Church. Most people think that the Catholic Church does not permit divorce. Divorce is a legal term. The Church certainly permits divorce. They permit separation from a spouse. What they do not permit is the spouse then to go on and have an affair with someone else or to remarry without— prior to their husband or wife dying or themselves getting an annulment. Usually annulments, if they're not being abused, are only granted when there are not children involved.

Well then, alright, well, you know, in light of your compliments, it's hard to differ with you, but I still have to. That really does mean that the church is against divorce.

Well, they don't, they don't promote it.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, nobody promotes it, but they don't allow it. They don't allow an annulment.

You can still go receive sacraments and be divorced. You cannot remarry.

Okay, all right, fine. Okay, okay, yeah, you can get— but that's a civil divorce, it's not a church divorce without an annulment. We'll be back in a moment.

This episode of Timeless Wisdom will We'll continue right after this.

We live in a time where the moment you question the narrative, you're told to stop thinking and start complying. That's why what Angel is doing matters. With eye-opening documentaries like Thank You, Dr. Fauci and RFK: Legacy, Angel is willing to explore the issues others avoid. In a culture shaped by gatekeepers, Angel offers something rare: a platform for truth-seeking storytelling that isn't constrained by fear or conformity. Go to angel.com/prager, join the Angel Guild, and watch these films today.

Now back to more of Dennis Prager's Timeless Wisdom.

And welcome back. This has been, and this is, The Ultimate Issues Hour. And I have asked the question on this hour, Dennis Prager here, what is the definition of family values? And I realize at this point that in America today it is pointless to use the term, and I think it has been dropped in fact by the people who, who developed it, which generally were conservatives or, and, and religious people. And that is that people marry, that they marry, namely a man and a woman marry, and that the ideal is that children of married people grow up with married people. But it has now been stretched to, it doesn't have, you don't, you can have a family without marrying. You can have a family based on members of the same sex living together. And so that there is no— and in other words, any unit of people living together is now called a family. So family value doesn't, by definition, can't mean anything, because if anything qualifies, then it doesn't mean anything. And as I said, it's, it's really remarkable because a term that was raised by a group to, to advocate a certain value is now only used in popular rhetoric against the person. So if you have a, if you have a Republican or conservative who's divorced, well, huh, what a hypocrite. Of course, there's no hypocrisy whatsoever, especially if the person remarries. It's a statement of commitment to marriage. But then you'll say, ah, how could you be committed to marriage and have a divorce? It's a question that can only be asked by people who don't know anybody who had to get divorced. I cannot— the question, the question makes no sense in real life. It only makes sense in theory, and I don't live in the world of theory. And the, the, the other examples are legion. Just any, any people living together has made a family, and that's it. So I guess the word pretty much has died. We now use, I guess, husband-wife-based family. Maybe that will be the term that will make it clear to people what is even referred to. But with marriage even less popular— why get married? Who needs a piece of paper? And as I've told you, women who do want to get married to a man you've been with for many years, and he says, "Ah, honey, why bother? It's only a piece of paper." I have a good answer for you. Well, darling, if it's only a piece of paper, why do you object? See, as a guy, I'm giving you women ammunition. Well, we've explored another issue on the Ultimate Issues Hour. I love to get mail from you. By the way, those of you interested in starting or joining Prager groups around the country with Prager listeners, send me your name and where you live to prageradio.com or dennisprager.com. Thank you for listening. I'm Dennis Prager.

Tomorrow on Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager.

What is your husband supposed to say when you ask him How do I look in this dress?

Okay, here's why I think the main problem is. Are you ready? Yes. Okay, this doesn't just apply with this, but it's you saying, what is a man supposed to answer?

Okay.

And I think men personally, they instead of being honest and speaking from their heart, they want to give the right answer so they're not in trouble. That's right. Okay, that is not good.

Join us tomorrow to hear more on Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager. This has been Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager. Visit DennisPrager.com for thousands of hours of Dennis's lectures, courses, and classic radio programs, and to purchase Dennis Prager's Rational Bibles. We want to take just a second to thank the team at Life Audio for their partnership with us on the podcast. Go to lifeaudio.com to find dozens of other faith-centered podcasts and their network, including shows about prayer, Bible study, parenting, and more.

We live in a time where the moment you question the narrative, you're told to stop thinking and start complying. That's why what Angel is doing matters. With eye-opening documentaries like Thank You, Dr. Fauci and RFK: Legacy, Angel is willing to explore the issues others avoid. In a culture shaped by gatekeepers, English-speaking truth-seekers, Angel offers something rare: a platform for truth-seeking storytelling that isn't constrained by fear or conformity. Go to angel.com/prager, join the Angel Guild, and watch these films today.