Let's pretend for a second we're not degenerates, and we actually want to raise a family. Now suppose you want to have a relationship and are looking for a spouse.
Some requirements you have for your spouse are:
1) Wants children and is able to have them
This goes without saying. If they can't have them, or doesn't want them, you cannot build a family with them.
You could just adopt.
2) Wants to do their fair share of work involved with raising them
Are you willing to take care of the family alone, while the spouse bitches from the backseat? No. This is also unhealthy for the children, and for yourself, you should not do this.
Depends on the arrangement. There's plenty of people who want to be the solo raiser, or just hire a Nanny on the cheap with a Nanny Cam making threats.
My folks had it split down the middle: One went to work while the other was the stay at home parent until around when I was five.
3) Must be able to make sacrifices for the greater good
Raising children properly implies both parents make sacrifices for them. If they're unable to, it's bad for the children, which is something bad for you, since you're not a degenerate and have decided to have a family.
I'd replace this with something about income economics. It's not a sacrifice if you plan for it, it's a sacrifice if you aren't ready for it.
You don't have to be a martyr to raise kids, you just need to be able to provide for them. "Sacrifice" is far too strong a word for a proper planner.
4) Must be trustworthy, and of good character.
This is extremely important, because you do not want the other person to wreck the family.
You'd have to be able to tell that you aren't the time bomb, too.
I'd replace this with some points about synergy. Even if both people are terrible on their own, if they 'complete' each other it can still work out, while two trustworthy types may find new feelings developing later.
I'd also use this opportunity to attack the notion of the inauthenticity of PC communication. The maintenance of 'civility' often hides bigger, realer problems, while people who can't help but speak their minds clear a lot of the stress queue (barring argumentative feedback loops within a misinformed coupling), giving the couple room to adapt over a longer period of time towards each other over less at a time, making for less shock and surprise.
5) You must enjoy each others company.
It's required because otherwise the dysfunction between spouses will not give the children a good model for relationships. And well, not being miserable does make the whole thing better.
They just need to accept each other's company enough to feel content with the situation. Natural synergy could have this happen over reasons that have nothing to do with their partner, such as if they live in a nice house with a lot of wealth.
Take strongly religious families (like the Catholics) and you can see often enough two partners who principally love each other without an ounce of understanding or (healthy forms of) passion.
Are there more requirements than the 4 above, that can't be reduced to one of them?
For real, I argue synergy.
I've seen failures succeed and seeming successes fail based purely on how well their partner got off with them, as opposed to how well they get off with anybody.
