Robert A. Teegarden's Blog

July 5, 2012

Kids will Suffer for the Sins of their Parents… Again

Filed under: Uncategorized — by Robert @ 10:17 am
Tags: , , ,

Senate Bill 1476 in California, authored by Mark Leno (D), would redefine parenthood to be more than two parents. The bill gives no limits… two, three, fourteen, twenty-four parents.  Let’s see… If parenthood is redefined, then all the laws pertaining to it would also be defined, including marriage.  The effort to redefine parenthood (and by extension—marriage) confronts two major obstacles on its course: religious values and mother nature.

Religious objections to these revisionist tactics, the redefinition of marriage or parenthood, are rooted in natural law.  The long tradition to enshrine this most holy and sacred relationship called marriage is based on the simple premise of nature:  new life, new human life, comes from the union of one the sperm of one man and the egg of one woman. Period.  Even with technical or political interference, this is the only way it can happen. The natural by-product of the marriaImagege union is new life. This new life is the building-block of cultures and societies. That’s why it’s sacred. For the religious it is a gift from God.

Even if you want to leave God out of the question, new life can come about in no other way.  Life requires the union of the sperm of one man and the egg of one woman.  Another way of expressing this is one mother and one father. We can tinker with the science like Joseph Mengele or one may practice the artificial art of in vitro fertilization.  But the basic ingredients remain the same.  Mother Nature is pretty clear about maternity and paternity.

Two eggs cannot be fertilized by the same sperm (used in the singular). It simply can’t happen.  Likewise, two sperm cannot fertilize the same (single) egg. In the rare occasions that this might occur it usually results in a chromosomal abnormality or molar pregnancy, neither of which can exist outside of the womb.  In short, new life requires one father and one mother, no more and no less.

Other adults might be able to nurture life to some extent.  Support structures come in a variety of ways throughout one’s life.  But regardless of the multifarious ways in which people engage in relationships of any kind, life always begins the same way.  Changing partners, multiplying relationships, surrogate parenting, and legal definitions to the contrary cannot alter natural law.  Paternity belongs to the father and maternity belongs to the mother, one of each.

Mr. Leno wants to alter the definition because of the life experiences of some of his constituents. He notes that there are same-sex couples or blended families, surrogate births, same-sex parenthood and assisted reproduction procedures.  But you see, all of these are artificial—they’re man-made (or woman-made).  They require some outside interference by man/woman in the natural process called conception and birth.  And despite arguments to the contrary, they are the exceptions to the “rule” of one father and one mother.  It’s not my rule, it’s mother nature’s.

So, the question is, why tinker with a fundamental law of nature to accommodate man’s experimentation and tinkering?  Why try to make the exceptions into the rule?  Convenience?

Leon says that giving the courts the discretion to recognize multiple parents is both beneficial and “required” for a child’s well-being. Whenever a politician says it’s “for the children” you should see red flags immediately.  It’s not.  Children are being set up to suffer for the sins of their “parents” again.

Ellen Pontac, a Davis gay-rights activist, said government should accommodate changing times. “I just think that people should be able to create their own lives,” she said.  You see, it’s NOT for the kids; it causes children to become the slaves of decisions made by adults. Don’t saddle kids with those so-called “creations.”

Children today have a hard enough time without Mr. Leno redefining one’s parents.  It’s hard enough to get to know your own.

Choices have consequences.  But just because adults want to play with their own lives doesn’t mean that children should have to bear those consequences.  If these activities do lead to the courts, it’s up to the courts to determine what is best in the situation.  Redefining parenthood doesn’t help because it’ll never work.  Certain of the lifestyles described are known for their promiscuity and proliferation. How in the world does this bring stability into the life of a child?

At the end of the day, parenthood occurs in only one way.  Whether the parents stay together, separate, migrate, alternate, swap, swing or substitute, that’s their choice.  Not the child’s. They deserve better.

No, Mr. Leno, no.

Advertisements

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: