The "erosion of social mores" had nothing to do with "liberalism."<quoted text>
It was the 'The Shining City Upon A Hill' until liberalism took over. The erosion of social mores brought on by burgeoning governmental largess and the pacification of a largely foreign dependent class, overloaded the treasury, which in turn led to the usurpation of wealth and inevitable collapse. Excessive government killed Rome.
Is equality for women "liberalism" or just what's right? Do conservatives oppose equality for women? If you still think of it that way, there's something wrong with you.
Equality isn't liberalism. It's Americanism.
The "erosion of social mores" was never in short supply; it was just underground. Men beat their wives without consequence because they were considered property. The fact that women, upon reclaiming their rights, left those men was no the erosion of social mores. It was the symptom of a lack of morality of the men who beat them, which was always there.
The erosion of social mores now is the disposability of marriage and family. Most people do not enter marriage with a serious commitment. They always think they have an "out" if they want. My brother just left his wife after 6 years and 2 kids because "he wasn't happy." I find that to be immoral. He had a girlfriend before they were even officially divorced. I find that to be immoral. His kids will suffer as a result of this. They were 3 and 1 at the time. I find that immoral.
And that's not liberalism.
If anything, conservative areas have MORE divorce than other places. Look it up. The most divorce is in the bible belt.
So it might be a cheap and easy scapegoat for you to blame everything on liberalism, but you're fooling yourself.