"a chance for both a mother and a father"
i came across this article ( clickety ) today. it unnerves me on multiple levels.
when i post things like this, i tend to take a little different tack than most. and i'm going to here as well. sortof. i am not going to look at the unconstitutionality of DOMA or the hypocrisy of the federal government leaving marriage rights up to the state and then deporting a legal spouse nevermind what the state decided about the legality of their marriage. what i want to talk about is this :
"There will always be exceptions, but the definition of marriage affects all American children," said Ashley Horne, federal policy analyst for CitizenLink, a policy arm of Focus on the Family. "A compassionate society promotes what is in their best interest, and that includes policies that would give every child a chance for both a mother and a father."
yes, the definition of marriage affects all american children. but does narrowing that definition based on something as circumstantial as gender do more harm than good? yes, yes it does. because some of those same american children are gay. saying that a union based on love only qualifies as a marriage if the two partners are of differing gender tells those children that their own loving relationships won't be as valid. which is a whole lot of bullshit. it affects the straight children, too, you know. it causes them to have to wonder about their gay peers. it causes them to have to struggle with reconciling their own views with their parents' views and with the laws of the states and the laws of the federal government. you know what? this is a good spot to see sarah silverman's it gets better video again. now.. where'd i put that?.. oh yeah. here it is.
the bigger issue with that little statement, for me, is this part: "A compassionate society promotes what is in their best interest, and that includes policies that would give every child a chance for both a mother and a father."
how is legally invalidating the relationship between two loving, supportive parents good for american children? it isn't. it's cruel. it's mean spirited. it's xenophobic. and it creates anything but a compassionate society for our children.
most gay parents rank up there with the best straight parents. you know why? they have to goto a lot of trouble to even be parents. they WANT it enough to go through the effort and the potential pain of repeated rejection. it's a lot easier for stupid straight people to become "parents" than it is for loving, well-adjusted and responsible gays.
do you have any idea how many straight parents out there are completely worthless? there are a lot of fathers out there that are worthless fucks. and there are a lot of mothers out there that are worthless fucks. i know plenty of kids ( some of mine included ) that have one worthless straight biological parent. and a few who have two ( myself included ). in fact. i am pretty much a walking, talking billboard for alternative family set ups that are far better ( and way more functional ) than a lot of "traditional" families. if you know me at all, you know this is true because you've probably seen the chart and heard the reasons.
anyway, here's my point : i don't WANT every child to just have a chance for both a mother and a father. i want every child to have a chance at one or more parents that will unconditionally love and support and teach them. and i do not give a good god damn if it's a mom and a dad, two moms, two dads, two of each, just one parent of either gender, or any other combination. i want every child to feel safe and secure and loved. and there is no one gender combination of parents that can do that any more or less effectively than another.
November, 02 2010 under parenting