The article under consideration is entitled New Family Values.

Its author and

the source where it was published arent mentioned. The article addresses one of
the urgent problems of any society family values which can be observed
immediately from the informative title. It also negotiates the morality issues. The
author tells us about William Hague, Tory leader, who thinks that the Party need to
get rid of priggish and sometimes prejudiced morality of the Fifties and before. In
his opinion We have to live comfortably in our own time.
Also the author covers the problem of old moral code. Many members of the last
administration were completely against the changing. They considered
homosexuality, single parenthood and working women as moral problems of the
society. At that time voters increasingly qualified this point of view as fatally outof-date and harsh. The author negotiates that even if people tend to become more
conservative as they age, those who have spent their lives believing in women's
equality, or tolerating homosexuality, are hardly going to turn against these beliefs.
The author stresses the idea through using such stylistic devices and expressive
means as metaphor (rhetoric sounded as harsh as that of a fire-and-brimstone
preacher), epithets for example: priggish and sometimes prejudiced morality, illadvised, out-of-date.
Also the author stresses a generational divide in British society. The majority of
people born after the War, and particularly those brought up during and after the
Sixties, share a certain set of attitudes about women, homosexuality and marriage.
As a result their children live their lives according to parents values and liberallyinclined voters will become an ever-increasing element of the electorate.
One more problem mentioned by the author is changes in the society. To accept
social change and to condone all social behavior are not the same things.
Nowadays cohabitation is no longer considered by most people as "living in sin".
Childless adults who decide to live together than or before marrying dont cause
harm to society.
The author covers a problem of single mothers. Their children will lack male role
models and they are likely to spend much of their life living off the State. But
many people became single parents through divorce or bereavement so attacking
all lone parenthood is immoral.
One more issue covered is importance of the family. Mr Hague praised the family
as one of the most successful institutions in society. And he drew attention to the
social and personal costs of family breakdown. In his opinion two-parent families
tend to work better than one. To stress the ideas author uses such stylistic devices
as metaphor (electoral oblivion), epithets: Liberally-inclined voters, everincreasing element, "never-married" single mothers.
After reading we can say that the author is rather subjective, there are many
different facts and several opinions and points of view in the article but the author
thinks that some family values are outdated and should be replaced.
I think that everyone should be tolerant and respectful to others. I agree that
nowadays some values and norms are pointless and out-of-day, but for some

people it makes sense and I think its ok. People have right to decide for
themselves how to live, what views to share and what values and moral standards
they consider acceptable. The main thing is not to condemn people with other
views and do not try to impose your opinion on them. Mutual respect should be the
basis of modern society.