Related to the questions about abortion in Chapter 14, the key debates about the role and structure of the family in society begin with reproductive rights---namely, to what degree bodily autonomy liberates women from the role of "mother" if/when they become pregnant. From there, the debates over parental and children's rights ensue---not only pertaining to rights, but also to responsibilities. The phrase "best interests of the child" has been both properly and improperly invoked in debating tangential issues indirectly related to the family (e.g., climate change).
Nearly every aspect of family life has been put up for debate, especially in recent years. Do parents have the right to refuse vaccines? Or to educate their children themselves at home? Or to allow their children to eat only a vegan diet? Or to allow them to get jobs at a young age? Or to try an experimental treatment? Or to teach them to follow a religious belief? Or not to affirm their kids' preferred pronouns? Everything seems to be at stake! And this fuels ongoing culture wars.
When we understand the foundational nature of the family to society, and that the state is the legal violence most often leveraged to intervene in family activities, it becomes much clearer why and how these cultural debates arise. The irony is that, without the legal violence of the state and its monopoly control over civil governance, these culture wars would be largely diffused. The disagreements would persist, but the incentive to leverage legal violence against one's neighbor is reduced.
This question is from Faith Seeking Freedom: Updated & Expanded, available in paperback, PDF, and Kindle.