A savvy blogger would have had two post’s written for BOTH possible rulings in the hopper today but, well, nope. Instead I’ve been spending my week at the beach with my kids, my mom, and her partner enjoying lazy mornings, tracking sand EVERYWHERE and damaging our locks with seawater. Heaven really.
I have spent a great amount of time this week reflecting on how blessed I am to have two such quality women in my life. My mom’s partner came into our lives when I was ten and brought with her a tender heart, a passion for new passions and an affinity for good music. I truly love and respect her. I also cannot not repeat enough that most of what I do well as a mother, I do because that’s how my mother parented me. She is an exceptional mother. If her partner would have had children, she would have totally rocked motherhood; it’s evident in every fiber of her being.
Thing is, even though they are all that, they both would have failed at being fathers.
Cue sirens ‘cause when the Bigoted Hater Police hear such statements they now have the word of the highest court in our land to reinforce their misguided ideology.
Some speculate that I must hate my mom to oppose same-sex marriage. But the reality is that my support of traditional marriage stems from the fact that two men, no matter how loving, could never have replaced this mother of mine. N E V E R.
See, most traditional marriage supporters agree that consenting adults should be able to form the relationships that they choose. What they oppose is state-endorsed motherlessness and fatherlessness. Marriage is not just about how adults feel about one another. Marriage serves a social good by connecting parents, especially fathers, to their biological children. Therefore redefining marriage redefines parenthood- in essence making mothers or fathers optional in the life of a child, which is a sociological lie regardless of what 5 justices believe. According to reason, biology and Top Shelf social science, children do not just need “role models,” or “guardians,” or even generic “parents.” Every child is conceived by, desires to be known by, and has a right to their mother and father. Children are incapable of protecting their own rights. That is the purview of adults. It is one of the few things our elected officials, and justices, are supposed to do.
Now that same-sex marriage is a constitutional “right” how will those parent-child bonds be respected and encouraged?
Well, the legal system is out.
While half the country is celebrating this as a victory for individuals they probably don’t realize what this really means. Like the fact that more adoption agencies who prefer to place children in homes where they will have both a mother and father will be closed, or that more states will be changing child birth certificates to reflect “intended” parents rather than the child’s actual heritage. That generally we have taken a gigantic step away from protecting children’s rights in order to cater to the desires of adults.
Next on the LGBT docket? “Reproductive justice”. You know, providing children to those at a “reproductive disadvantage”. Those who cannot make their reproductive organs do the impossible are suffering an injustice that society is required to rectify. Perhaps your vision is short sighted but I can assure you that for many, the “right” to marriage has been one step in a right to parenthood. As one hopeful gay father wrote: “Access to fertility services is critical to the full recognition of LGBT people’s right to build their families in the ways they choose.”
Got that? The “right” to build a family the way “they” choose- which will include denying “their” child a relationship with her mother. So now rather than telling every adult, gay or straight, that they should arrange their life in such a way so that children’s rights and well-being are protected, increasingly children will be commodified to suit adult desires. Today we have shifted away from the rights of children toward a “right to children.”
SCOTUS has ruled but we are far from finished with this one folks. Now begins the fight to terminate children’s rights to a father AND mother. It shouldn’t surprise me. It is the same court that ruled that adults have a right to terminate the life of an unborn child so the mother/father bit is a no-brainer.
So, the time has come for civil disobedience because fighting for children’s rights has just become unconstitutional.