Claim. Parents exist for their children — the word “parent” is meaningless otherwise — and the parental position is uniquely good: there are good and bad teachers and siblings, but even evil parents teach their children to do good.
Elaboration. SMM derives the parent-for-child rule from the meaning of the word: “Parents exist for their children. If parents lived for themselves, the word parent would not exist. From now on, moral principles should be formed centering on the Principle of the Unification Church… Living for the child is not an unhappy thing, but something happy and joyful” (4.1. Parents are closer than friends, 62-214, 1972.9.25). The asymmetric goodness of parenthood is striking: “No parents teach their own children to do wrong. Nevertheless, it is possible for a teacher to teach his students to do wrong… There are two kinds of teachers and two kinds of brothers. But there is only one kind of parent. Even evil parents teach their children to do good things” (ibid, 28-85, 1970.1.4). The belonging hierarchy is providence-structured: “first you belong to God, and then you belong to your child. After that, you belong to yourself” (ibid, 18-209, 1967.6.8). Parental love is not chosen behaviour but life-force-derived: “Parents’ love toward their children does not just come from their everyday relationships with each other. It is a love that springs up from the very marrow of their bones” (ibid, 32-15, 1970.6.14). Parental love thus models the principle of creation itself.