I love waking up and realizing yet another way in which modern society has it all wrong. We should be extremely preferential to our firstborn and encourage our children to be so as well. Well, to be more precise, our boys. Having some conception of 'continuing the line' means a young man will care a lot more about the quality of the character of who he mates with.
Christianity, for all it's charms, doesn't seem capable of handling this situation. If there is no sense of the first-born being important, then the import begins to lie more on the 'getting married' side of things; this merely means it takes slightly longer to engage in an unwise deed, and since most Christian authorities insist on conforming with state laws, married Christian men get to be pushed into state sanctioned slavery for choosing the wrong girl. He also loses any real authority over his children. (Well, technically, it is already lost, but a few ladies allow us to exercise it at their pleasure.)
What egalitarians miss is that the conditions necessary for preferential treatment of the firstborn are also the conditions which provide for the second, third, and more better than any egalitarian plan of action. This is because making sure the firstborn is not a bastard, that he can be properly educated rather than imprisoned and propagandized, that he can eat real food, that his mother has some intelligence, propriety, and decency- all this leads to a situation in which every other child in that family has a better upbringing. So, the life of the third child in a family with firstborn preferential treatment has better treatment than a child raised by some single mother who has had children by different fathers before him.
Indeed, do we not see, that rather than distributing any estate in an egalitarian manner, the state distributes wealth according to it's own interests, and merely takes equality as a pretext?
Who has an estate now? Especially among the baby boomers, it seems likely they will spend every last dollar and run up credit card bills besides. In our modern cases, the youngest children, those allegedly discriminated against in a more hereditary system, are most likely worst off. If there is anything to squabble over, your oldest sons are bigger. If there are broken families, your oldest sons are first out of the house, while your younger ones suffer longer under the psychological damage.
Indeed, I may wake with the joy of thinking something new, something true, but then I realize it is so true that it is making me angry. Because I am the eldest in my family, and most of us who are care about the young ones.