Reports And Briefings

5 Recommendations for the White Houses's AI Action Plan

In times of revolutionary technological change such as our own, it is challenging to preserve and extol what is distinctly human. This is especially the case when the technological change is state-sponsored, as AI is becoming under the Trump Administration. In his recent executive order, President Trump stated that his administration seeks “to sustain and enhance America’s global AI dominance in order to promote human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security.”²  We praise the Trump Administration for foregrounding human flourishing as a primary policy objective in its quest for AI superiority and for seeking to direct federal efforts to promote its advancement.

Though promoting human flourishing is first on the list of priorities for how to sustain and enhance America’s global AI dominance, much of the deepest thinking around AI has focused on the administration’s latter two policy goals, i.e., economic competitiveness and national security. While these three goals are fundamentally interrelated, human flourishing cannot be simply reduced to economic and military dominance.

Our comment seeks to offer guidance regarding the administration’s first AI policy goal: the promotion of human flourishing. As we and others have outlined in “A Future for the Family: A New Technology Agenda for the Right,” a statement that has garnered the support of dozens of eminent conservative leaders alongside prominent technologists, human flourishing depends on a culture of thriving families.³ The family begets human children, and it is unmatched in its natural ability to raise them to be healthy and productive. In other words, there can be no policy to promote human flourishing that does not have the objective of empowering and advancing the well-being of families. Conversely, any technological program that undermines the family is opposed to human flourishing. We echo Vice President Vance’s hope that AI can “make people more productive, more prosperous, and more free,” as he put it in his February 11, 2025, speech at the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris, France. But as the president’s executive order underscores, ensuring that human flourishing is advanced in the era of AI will require the government to make deliberate policy choices.

We recommend the following five policy actions: 1) establish the President’s Council on Technology and the Family; 2) require family impact and opportunity assessments; 3) incorporate a family-focused strategy and personnel in AI research and development; 4) balance automation with investments in job recovery and skill development; and 5) protect minors from AI-related harms.   

 

Abstract

American young adults face a housing affordability crisis far more severe than the crisis facing older Americans. Among young adults under age 35, homeownership rates have fallen by almost half since the 1970s, while the rate among older Americans has been comparatively stable. This young adult housing affordability crisis is a major factor suppressing rates of marriage and fertility in the United States, thus imperiling the health, happiness, and long-term demographic outlook for the entire country. Although the current plight of young families has many causes, local, regional, state, and federal housing policies have contributed in damaging ways. 

While our novel survey of over 8,000 Americans ages 18-54 reveals enormous pent-up demand for spacious, single-family housing in safe neighborhoods despite longer commutes or smaller yards, actual land-use regulations increasingly ban this kind of development. Urban growth boundaries prevent expansion into new greenfield developments, even as pro-development “Yes-In-My-Back-Yard” (YIMBY)-style policies focus almost exclusively on small housing units in large buildings, a housing type Americans almost uniformly dislike for their family in our representative survey.

In order to tackle falling fertility and marriage rates, policymakers must tackle restrictive housing policies, particularly those policies that prevent the construction of commercially-developed, efficiently-arranged, reasonably-priced single-family homes. To that end, this IFS report provides policy recommendations for every level of authority ranging from neighborhood HOAs to the federal government, with specific advice on how to ensure that government policies persistently create affordable housing for all Americans—especially young adults hoping to transition into family life.

What is the Family Structure Index?

The Family Structure Index is a measure of the most important family structure trends in the US, focusing on each state’s share of adult residents who are married, have children, and raise those children together through their high-school years.

How was the Index Calculated?

The index was calculated for each state by: 1) The percentage of married adults aged 25 to 54, 2) The average number of lifetime births per woman. 3) The percentage of children aged 15 to 17 who are living with their married parents.

What Does the Index Score Mean?

Index scores higher than 60 indicate that the state is above the national average in at least one of the components. Index scores lower than 60 mean the state is below average in at least one area

What is the American dream? It is a “better, richer, and happier life for all our citizens of every rank,” in the words of James Truslow Adams, the historian who coined the term just over a century ago. Adams knew it would be hard to sustain the dream. That is why every generation must strive, he wrote, to “save the dream from the forces which appeared to be overwhelming and dispelling it.”¹

In our day, we know that ordinary citizens’ faith in the American dream is diminished. A recent Wall Street Journal poll found only one in three of U.S. adults feels the American dream still “holds true” compared to half of those polled in 2012.² There are good reasons for this. For many Americans, life is not “better, richer, and happier.” In this century, “deaths of despair”—with ordinary Americans dying because of suicide, drug overdoses, or alcohol poisoning—have surged, even as reports of hope and happiness among the American people have fallen.³

Although the precarious state of the dream can be attributed in part to changes in the nation’s economy, one of the biggest, unheralded forces “dispelling” the American dream is the falling

fortunes of the American family. Recent research from Gallup and the University of Chicago, for instance, suggests that the nation’s retreat from marriage is one of the most important factors driving deaths of despair up and happiness down across America.⁴

This research could not be more relevant for the state of Ohio. Right now, the American dream is out of reach for too many men, women, and children across Ohio. Tens of thousands of men and women in the state have lost their lives to suicide, drugs, and alcohol in the last decade, such that the state ranks third in deaths of despair.⁵ As Figure 1 (page IV) indicates, 17% of Ohio children are poor, putting the state in the top third (15th) of states for child poverty. And the state ranks in the bottom quintile when it comes to hope.⁶ So, when it comes to guaranteeing a “better, richer, and happier life” for all families, Ohio clearly has a ways to go.

One key to saving the dream in Ohio is to strengthen and stabilize family life across the state. This is especially important because Ohio ranks 29th on the new Family Structure Index from Center for Christian Virtue (CCV) and the Institute for Family Studies (IFS). The index, which is based on trends in marriage, family stability, and fertility and is introduced for the first time in this report, indicates that the state falls below average on key indicators of family strength.

Ohio’s below-average standing on the Family Structure Index matters because this report will show how closely the fortunes of Ohio families are tied to educational success, poverty, and the emotional well-being of children across the state, how strong families are tied to safer streets, how closely connected economic mobility for poor children is to the state of the unions in their communities across the state, and how falling fertility imperils the demographic future of the state, as Ohio media outlets have recently noted.⁷ Moreover, given the importance of the family for children, adults, and the state as a whole, this report from Center for Christian Virtue and the Institute for Family Studies also spells out a series of public policies and civic measures the legislature, businesses, churches, and families can advance to renew the foundations of marriage and family across the state. We do so because we want every Ohioan—men, women, and especially children—to have a shot at the “better, richer, and happier life” that the American dream offers.

1. David Leonhardt, Ours Was the Shining Future: The Story of the American Dream. (Random House, 2023): xii.
2. Rachel Wolfe, “The American Dream Feels Out of Reach for Most.” Wall Street Journal. (August 2024).
3. Carol Graham, “America’s crisis of despair.” Brookings Institution. (January 2021).
   Sam Peltzman, “The Socio-Political Demography of Happiness.” U Chicago Stigler Center. (October 2023).
4. Peltzman, “The Socio-Political Demography.” Jonathan Rothwell, “Married People are Living Their Best Lives.” Institute for Family Studies. (February 2024).
5. Susan Hayes, David Radley, et al., “States of Despair.” The Commonwealth Fund. (August 2018).
6. “The Geography of Hope and Desperation in America: An Interactive Vulnerability Indicator.” Brookings Institution. January 2023.
7. Mark Williams, “Ohio’s population projections are dire. Why are so many counties left behind?” Columbus Dispatch. October 2024. https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/local/2024/10/13/ohio-projections-show-most-counties-will-lose-population-by-2050/74710065007/;
   Samantha Hendrickson, “Ohio’s baby bust: Why young Buckeyes are having kids at the lowest rate in history,” Columbus Dispatch. October 2024.  https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/local/2024/10/20/ohios-birth-rate-is-low-why-arent-buckeyes-having-kids/75071740007/

Introduction

“Marriage is a path to misery and a transition of loss marked by giving up and missing out.” This is the message that, surprisingly enough, is emanating from both leftwing journalists like Amy Shearn, who tells us in The New York Times that “Married motherhood in America… is a game no one wins,” and rightwing online influencers like Andrew Tate, who claim “there is zero advantage to marriage in the Western world for a man”—especially because “it’s very common that women” divorce their husbands. Given the rise of so many anti-marriage voices in the public square, not to mention technological, cultural, and educational shifts that have made it harder to find a romantic partner, it should come as no surprise that a growing share of young adults are discounting marriage and turning towards work as the focus of their lives. One Pew Research Center survey found, for instance, that today’s men and women are about three times more likely to consider “career enjoyment” as the “key to living a fulfilling life,” compared with “marriage.”

But what many elites and ordinary Americans alike do not realize is that, in general, married men and women across the United States are much more likely to be both prosperous and happy than their single peers. Married men and women, for instance, have about 10 times the assets as their single peers in their 50s, heading towards retirement, as Brad Wilcox notes in his book, Get Married: Why Americans Must Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization. Perhaps more importantly, both married men and women are almost twice as likely to be “very happy” with their lives, compared to their unmarried peers, according to Get Married. They also report more meaning and less loneliness than their unmarried peers. These results parallel other recent research from University of Chicago economist Sam Peltzman indicating that for both men and women, marriage is “the most important differentiator” of who is happy in America. Meanwhile, Peltzman concluded that falling marriage rates are a chief reason why happiness has declined nationally. His research found an astounding 30-percentage-point happiness gap between married and unmarried Americans.

Although the research on the benefits of marriage is robust, it is also clear that the benefits of marriage do not generally extend to men and women who experience persistent marital unhappiness or end up divorced. Accordingly, it is important to understand what factors predict marital quality and stability in the twenty-first century. 

Increasing knowledge about how to create a loving and lasting marriage is particularly important for the rising generation, as recent studies show that most teens and young adults continue to have plans to one day get married and have children. In fact, the MAST Center (or Marriage Strengthening Research & Dissemination Center) recently analyzed the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) and found that 95% of teens ages 15 to 19 still hope to get married when they get older.

Unfortunately, some young adults are losing confidence that they can actually have the successful marriage they hope for. This is because they have not seen good models of marriage in their own families of origin and have not been taught how to make a marriage that will last. They do not understand that not all marriages are the same. We often do not distinguish between different types of marriages in our cultural narrative about couple relationships. But the truth is that different couples marry for different reasons, have different priorities, and have different patterns of interaction.

Young people are frequently unaware of the fact that different kinds of marriages have unique profiles of risk factors and protective factors, and because of this, the divorce rate varies greatly. They have never been told that many marriages have strong foundations that make them incredibly resilient and enduring. And they certainly are not aware that many of the most important protective factors that contribute to an enduring and flourishing marriage are controllable and fall within the scope of their agency.   

There is a growing need to help young people understand that the true roots of enduring marriage are within their reach and that there are proactive ways that they can initiate and form an enduring union. Given young adults’ high desire for marriage, understanding the truth of how loving and lasting marriages are formed can help the rising generation have confidence in their own ability to pursue this path in their own lives. 

Helping young people achieve their life goals of marriage is deeply important because a happy marriage is one of the best predictors of life satisfaction for men and women. Accordingly, in this report from the Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute, we sought to find the top attitudes and behaviors that were predictive of a high-quality and stable marriage in a recent survey of married men and women.

Introduction 

A new era of technological change is upon us. It threatens to supplant

the human person and make the family functionally and biologically

unnecessary. But this anti-human outcome is not inevitable.

Conservatives must welcome dynamic innovation, but they should

oppose the deployment of technologies that undermine human goods.

We must enact policies that elevate the family to a primary

constituency of technological advancement. Our aim should be a newly

re-functionalized household for the twenty-first century.

 

Technology is meant to empower the human person. We have seen, however,

that if left ungoverned, technological advancement too easily comes to hinder

human flourishing and threatens the human person and the family. Many of the

most important political questions of our day have been prompted by the moral

implications of new technologies: Should human life be artificially created or

destroyed? Can people change genders? Should digital obscenity be accessible

to all ages in the name of free speech? Should jobs that sustain families be

automated? We must discern prudent ways to govern technology in order to

keep the human person, human dignity, and the common good as the central

goals of our politics. We must ensure that new technologies serve human life

and the human family, not the other way around.

Executive Summary

With the advent of the Internet and social media, the introduction of smartphones, and the continued proliferation of other online technologies, pornography consumption has changed dramatically in our modern society. These advancements have changed both the amount and the types of sexual content available online. As a result, experts have documented that the number of people using pornography and the level of engagement of these users have increased exponentially in the last two decades. 

While these trends cut across all age groups, the emergence of a new form of childhood, where children and teens have unrestricted access to online sexual materials, has today made pornography use widespread among young people. It is not an overstatement that children and adolescents now have more access to pornography than any generation in history. Despite pornography being designated as “adult content,” in this new form of childhood our judicial system has gone out of its way to protect the rights of porn providers to distribute this material to kids (and adults) without constraint. That the pornography industry is afforded this deference—despite the overwhelming social science research that shows that underage pornography use is now the norm, rather than the exception, and that its availability has radical implications for healthy adolescent development in our society—is one of the crises of our time. 

Children and Teens Are Frequently Accessing Explicit Pornography with Developmentally Harmful Content 

The rise in underage pornography use has been paralleled by a shift to more extreme and harmful types of pornography being available online. A growing body of research has consistently shown that a large portion of the sexual media available online is not only sexually explicit, but also regularly depicts rape, violence against women, deviant sexual behaviors such as incest and sex with minors, and various other forms of developmentally harmful content. In an alarming trend, a growing number of studies are also finding that a significant portion of minors are directly seeking out and viewing these types of harmful online sexual materials. 

It is time for our culture to come to terms with the inconsistency of placing value in the dignity and importance of developing a strong rising generation of children, girls, and women, but then turning a blind eye to the types of messages conveyed in pornography to our young people. Such violent, demeaning, and deviant content is not merely passive media that has little to no effect on young minds. On the contrary, decades of media studies have shown that consuming any type of media likely influences both the attitudes and behaviors of young children and teenagers. 

Pornography consumption by children and adolescents has been shown to be frequently harmful to their healthy development in a number of significant ways 

The preponderance of evidence from social science research is that pornography consumption by underage children and adolescents is harmful to their healthy development in significant ways. This research shows that pornography consumption increases young people’s risk for both short-term and long-term harms, including, increased mental health problems, unhealthy sexual scripts and behaviors, increased sexual aggression, potential compulsive struggles, decreased future relationship stability, and other developmental challenges. 

Studies to date also confirm that while pornography poses a significant risk to all users, the likelihood of harm is increased among underage children and teens due to their sensitive developmental stage of life. And the risk of lasting harm is even greater for teens with a set of existing risk factors that make them particularly vulnerable to the threats of pornography. 

Studies also show that many of these risks continue into adulthood and have deleterious effects on later relationship quality and adult wellbeing. Such effects have been documented across dozens of studies, including large national surveys, recent meta-analyses (studies designed to systematically assess the results of previous research), and critical reviews of scientific literature, the highest standards for social science research. 

Parents, industry leaders, and officers of government need to promote measures that protect children from the documented harms of underage pornography use 

Trends around the globe show that an increasing number of children and adolescents in our modern world are struggling with mental health problems, family disruption, and other notable challenges. Much of this increase appears to be the result of a collective social failure to properly protect children from the rise of digital childhood, daily social media consumption, harmful content on the internet, and other online threats. Protecting the best interests of children in these modern times will require us to more fully acknowledge the “rise in vulnerability” we are witnessing among children and teens across the globe. 

When it comes to collective action to safeguard children the fundamental question we must address is not, “Does all pornography harm all children all of the time?” Rather, if we are to properly safeguard young people, the question we must ask that sets the baseline standard of protection is, “Does at least some pornography harm some children some of the time?” 

Existing research clearly shows that this standard is being met, even under the strictest of scientific standards. In fact, existing research confirms an even higher standard of harm and shows that most pornography harms most children most of the time. When all of the various ways that pornography can harm child development are considered, there is really no defensible argument for children and adolescents having unrestricted access to sexual media and pornographic materials of any form. 

We deeply support efforts to hold both the producers of pornography and social media platforms accountable for making sure they are not contributing to and profiting from underage pornography use. For example, some states have recently passed laws requiring pornography websites to verify a user’s age, and in the case of social media, obtain parental consent, in order to gain access. Furthermore, a new effort to implement device-based age verification, and require parental supervision for minor social media accounts, parental consent for app downloads, and accurate app ratings from the industry, would contribute to a critical effort to create a safer digital app environment for children in which parents are effectively involved. Our children need and deserve nothing less.

When it comes to how Artificial intelligence (AI) will affect our lives, the response from industry insiders, as well as the public, ranges from a sense of impending doom to heraldry. We do not yet understand the long-term trajectory of AI and how it will change society. Something, indeed, is happening to us—and we all know it. But what?

Gen Zers and Millennials are the most active users of generative AI. Many of them, it appears, are turning to AI for companionship. “We talk to them, say please and thank you, and have started to invite AIs into our lives as friends, lovers, mentors, therapists, and teachers,” Melissa Heikkilä wrote in MIT Technology Review. After analyzing 1 million ChatGPT interaction logs, a group of researchers found that “sexual role-playing” was the second most prevalent use, following only the category of “creative composition.” The Psychologist bot, a popular simulated therapist on Character.AI—where users can design their own “friends”—has received “more than 95 million messages from users since it was created."  

According to a new Institute for Family Studies/YouGov survey of 2,000 adults under age 40, 1% of young Americans claim to already have an AI friend, yet 10% are open to an AI friendship. And among young adults who are not married or cohabiting, 7% are open to the idea of a romantic partnership with AI.

A much higher share (25%) of young adults believe that AI has the potential to replace real-life romantic relationships. Furthermore, heavy porn users are the most open to romantic relationships with AI of any group and are also the most open to AI friendships in general.  

In addition to AI and relationships, the new IFS survey also asked young Americans how they feel about the changes AI technology may bring to society. We find that their reactions to AI are divided. About half of young adults under age 40 (55%) view AI technology as either threatening or concerning, while 45% view it as either intriguing or exciting.  

There are complex socio-economic findings, too, with young adults with lower incomes and less education being more likely than those with higher incomes and more education to fear how AI will affect society. At the same time, this group is more likely than their fellow Americans who are better off to be open to a romance with AI.¹

1 in 10 Young Adults Are Open to AI Friends 

When asked about the prospect of having an AI friend designed to simulate human interaction and provide emotional support, just over half of American young adults (57%) say that they are either against it for ethical reasons or just not comfortable with it. In contrast, 1 in 10 young adults (11%) are open to having an AI friend, with 1% already having one. Another one-third of young adults (32%) either have mixed feelings about AI friendships or are unsure whether they would befriend a chatbot. This large mixed/unsure group represents the possibility of a significant increase in users in future years.

Further analysis reveals some key demographic differences. Men are more open to AI friendships than women (13% vs. 9%). Liberals show greater openness compared to conservatives (14% vs. 9%), with conservatives more likely to express discomfort or opposition to the idea. 

Meanwhile, how much time young adults spend online appears to influence their openness to AI friends. Excluding online activities related to work or study, young adults who spend an average of more than six hours online per day are much more likely to express openness to AI friendships than those who spend less time online. About 1 in 6 young adults (16%) who spend more than six hours online in their spare time say they are open to having an AI friend (including the 1% that already have one), compared with 9% of young adults who spend less time online. 

7% of Single Young Adults Are Open to AI Romantic Partners

Among young adults who are not married or cohabiting, a small share (7%) say they see potential benefits and are open to having an AI romantic partner (including the fewer than 1% who already have one). A vast majority of young adults are not comfortable with the idea or are against it (71%); and 22% have mixed feelings or are unsure—again, representing the potential for a more significant uptake.

Interestingly, Gen Z adults without a romantic partner are more likely than unpartnered Millennials to oppose the idea of an AI romance (74% vs. 67%). Even though a similar share of Gen Zers and Millennials are open to it (7% vs. 8%), Millennials are more likely than Gen Zers to have mixed feelings about an AI girlfriend or boyfriend. 

Education and income also play a role. College-educated young adults without partners (including those who are currently in college) are more likely than those without a college degree to disapprove of an AI romantic partner (76% vs. 67%). At the same time, unpartnered young adults with higher incomes are more likely than those with lower incomes to reject the idea of an AI romance. More than 80% of unpartnered young adults under age 40 with an income of $100,000 or more say they are either opposed to, or are uncomfortable with, the idea of an AI romantic partner, compared with 64% of young adults with incomes less than $40,000.

Can AI Replace Real-Life Romance? 

One in four young adults believe that AI girlfriends and boyfriends have the potential to replace real-life romantic relationships, while most (75%) do not see AI as a viable replacement for human partners.

Young men are more likely than young women to believe that AI has the potential to replace real-life romantic relationships (28% vs. 22%). As shown earlier, young men are generally more open to AI friendships than young women, which parallels the gender difference in their views of AI’s potential for romance. Differences across other demographic categories, including age, education, income, and religion, are small and statistically insignificant.

Porn Use and Views of AI Romance

Pornography has become a part of online life for many young adults today. About 1 in 10 Americans under age 40 watch porn online at least once a day, and 34% watch it on at least a weekly basis, according to a recent study the IFS conducted. Young adults who use porn frequently are more likely to experience loneliness and depression than those who do not. It is possible that young adults who use pornography heavily are also more open to AI companionship, especially given that so-called “sexbots” are already widely used.

Among unpartnered young adults, heavy porn users turn out to be the group most open to the idea of an AI girlfriend or boyfriend. Among single young adults, those who watch porn online at least once a day are twice as likely as those who rarely, if ever watch porn to say they are open to an AI romance. More than 10% of heavy porn users say they are open to it (which includes the 1% of young adults in this group who already have an AI girlfriend or boyfriend).  

When asked about the future of AI in romantic relationships, heavy porn users are much more optimistic than others. More than one-third of heavy porn users (35%) believe that AI girlfriends or boyfriends have the potential to replace real-life romance, compared with 20% of young adults who rarely watch porn.

Heavy porn users are also more favorable toward having an AI friend in general. More than 1 in 5 young adults who view porn daily (21%) say they are open to having an AI friend (including the 3% who already have an AI friend), compared with those who never or rarely view pornography online (8%). Heavy porn users are the only group that we surveyed in which less than half hold negative views about an AI friend, with 44% saying they are either against or not comfortable with having an AI friend.

Young Adults’ Divided Views on AI’s Future

In addition to AI’s role in relationships, we also surveyed young adults on how they view AI’s potential future effect on society. We find that their reactions to AI are quite divided. About half of young adults under age 40 (55%) find AI technology threatening or concerning, while 45% find it either intriguing or exciting.  

There is a sex divide in the attitude of young adults toward AI: Young women are much more likely than young men to perceive AI as a threat (28% vs. 23%) and are less likely to be excited about AI’s effect on society (11% vs. 20%).

Similarly, conservative young adults are more inclined to see AI as threatening or concerning compared to their liberal counterparts (60% vs. 55%). 

Socioeconomic differences are also a factor, with young adults in lower-income families being more likely to view AI as a concern or threat compared to those from higher-income households (60% vs. 49%). Additionally, young adults without a college degree are more concerned about AI than those who are in college or who have already earned a bachelor’s degree (57% vs. 52%).

Lastly, secular young adults show more concern about AI than their religious peers (60% vs. 49%); they are also less intrigued or excited about AI’s role in society (40% vs. 51%). 

Conclusion

In sum, these survey findings suggest that even though the majority of Gen Zers and Millennials are not yet comfortable with the prospect of an AI friend or romantic partner, a much higher share (25%) believe that AI could replace real-life romantic relationships in the future. There is also a significant share of the population that is unsure; meaning, we might just be seeing the beginning of a much larger social phenomenon. Young adults who spend more time online in their spare time are more likely to be open to AI companions in general. Further, young adults who are heavy porn users are the group most open to the idea of having an AI girlfriend or boyfriend—as well as an AI friendship.

There is an apparent class divide in how young adults view the future effect of AI on society. Young adults with lower incomes and less education are more likely to see AI technology as a destructive force in society. However, when it comes to the idea of having an AI romance, these young adults are more open to the idea than those with college education or higher income. 

That 1% of American young adults in the survey report having an AI friend is significant because it marks the beginning of profound change in how we relate to one another: from a world where humans connect and form romantic bonds with each other to a world in which humans engage romantically with machines. The greater openness to AI relationships among those with a pornography addiction may strike some readers as obvious, if not telling. But the complex reaction to AI among lower-income Americans certainly raises important and pressing questions. Is it related to the decline of marriage among lower-income and less educated Americans, who might feel forced to be more open to AI romance but also naturally fear the consequences? Could this further the class divide in marriage and family life, in which romantic relationships between humans and robots will be stratified by income?  These are necessary questions for further study and exploration.

Is the long-standing tie between the Republican Party and marriage fraying in an era when the party’s standard bearer has flouted so many of the institution’s values and virtues? Has the emergence of a post-religious right severed the affinity between marriage and the Republican party?

No, the data suggest that the relationship between the Republican Party and marriage has largely persisted amidst the Trump era. Even during a series of realignments reconfiguring the relationship between partisanship and key axes of identity in American life today, this Institute for Family Studies (IFS) research brief finds that Republicans continue to be markedly more likely than Democrats to be married—and this is true for several subgroups in the population.

 

 

 

The city of Springfield, Ohio, gained unwanted notoriety recently, but Springfield and other Ohio cities have genuine problems that have nothing to do with dubious claims of barbecued pets. In these cities, the majority of children under age 18 are being raised by single mothers (either never married or divorced/separated) who do not live with their children’s fathers or stepfathers. 

In Springfield, for example, only 44% of mothers were married and living with their husbands and children during the five-year period from 2018-2022. In Cleveland, only 33% were. In Youngstown, 32%; while in Cincinnati, 46%. By contrast, in the suburban community of Cleveland Heights, 63% of mothers were married, while in New Albany, Ohio, 91% were. In Ohio as a whole, 68% of mothers were married and lived with their husbands and children.