California Supreme Court Flunks Biology
Further proof that the Woman's movement is winning -
The California Supreme Court ruled yesterday in three cases that the court is the final arbitrators of parental rights and that judges, not biology, define parents. The cases, all involving lesbian couples, dealt with a request for child support by a non-biological partner, a petition to establish parental rights for an egg donor, and a ruling that one lesbian partner should be listed as the "father" on a child's birth certificate. The court actually declared, "We see no reason why both parents of a child cannot be women." The fact that it is biologically impossible seems not to matter.
The fundamental notion that has existed for centuries is that families are formed by blood, marriage, or adoption--period. Some people argue that denying people the right to form alternative "families" constitutes government meddling with people's individual liberty. But yesterday's decisions prove exactly the opposite. The further we move from nature's own definition of family and allow the state to define "parenthood" without reference to biology, marriage, or even legal commitment, the more we invite endless meddling by the courts. And when the California Supreme Court decides that a child doesn't need both a mom and a dad, it is the children who ultimately lose.
Additional Resources
Homosexual Parenting
The California Supreme Court ruled yesterday in three cases that the court is the final arbitrators of parental rights and that judges, not biology, define parents. The cases, all involving lesbian couples, dealt with a request for child support by a non-biological partner, a petition to establish parental rights for an egg donor, and a ruling that one lesbian partner should be listed as the "father" on a child's birth certificate. The court actually declared, "We see no reason why both parents of a child cannot be women." The fact that it is biologically impossible seems not to matter.
The fundamental notion that has existed for centuries is that families are formed by blood, marriage, or adoption--period. Some people argue that denying people the right to form alternative "families" constitutes government meddling with people's individual liberty. But yesterday's decisions prove exactly the opposite. The further we move from nature's own definition of family and allow the state to define "parenthood" without reference to biology, marriage, or even legal commitment, the more we invite endless meddling by the courts. And when the California Supreme Court decides that a child doesn't need both a mom and a dad, it is the children who ultimately lose.
Additional Resources
Homosexual Parenting
posted by LadyMontana | 2:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home