Just Another Day for Dr. J
Today CatholicVote.org published an article that covers a lecture Dr J gave in early February. In fact we already have a thread about it. (Pro-Family Speaker Challenges Students) But apparently people are still writing about her talk, it is a presentation well worth revisiting, and the author of the article very succinctly sums up what I consider be one of the greatest dangers – if not the very greatest danger – of same-sex ‘marriage’. (See the second quote box below.)
Be sure to watch .
Tom Crowe:
Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, president of the Ruth Institute, gave an interesting talk here on campus not too long ago. Her topic, “Same-Sex Marriage: Why Not?” remains timely so I thought I’d share the short excerpts, her main points, and the video of the full lecture.
The article concludes:
The long and the short of it is an effect of same-sex marriage, whether proponents of same-sex marriage intend this or not, is to further the disconnection between parenthood and biology, kicking the determination of who qualifies as a child’s “parents” into the state’s hands entirely. This then makes all children wards of the state entrusted to the care of one or two or more adults (any of whom may or may not have a biological connection to the child) until such time as the state finds cause to dissolve that connection and move the child to another set of adults whom it decides are suitable.
But, of course, it wouldn’t end there. No, no no no. Catch the last 10 minutes of the lecture to hear where Dr. Morse sees it all heading.
Oh, Brave New World.
Loading ...
Uh, the “disconnecting” of children is a result of straight couples divorcing, and remarrying. Children are told, “that guy who was your dad yesterday isn’t your dad now, you have a new dad.”
I think worrying about whether a kid has different-gender parents or same-sex parents is a lot less important than whether a kid has an ongoing relationship with the adults who claim to be his parents.
@Sean
Sean, even when divorce separates children from one of their parents, at least those children still know that they do indeed have two parents – as well as who their parents are in most cases. That is only occasionally the case when same-sex couples rear children.
Before a same-sex couple can gain custody of a child, the legal connection between that child and at least one parent must be completely and permanently severed. Children being reared by same-sex couples grow up believing at first that they have two parents – just of the same sex. (???) But eventually they learn – one way or the other – that they have actually been denied either a father or a mother. And they often don’t ever even get to know who their other parent is.
Don’t try to tell me that’s not ever going to have detrimental consequences…
It’s not going to have detrimental consequences.
And the state has always been the arbiter of legal parenthood. Remember the story of Solomon and the baby-splitting?
Yes I do, Frank. Do you remember what the dispute was in the first place that Solomon was being asked to resolve? It was over who was actually the biological mother of the child. THAT is the starting point that the state, as … the arbiter of legal parenthood…, has always assumed. Children are only removed from their (biological) parents’ custody if those parents are deemed to be unfit – at least that’s been the case up until now.
Legalizing same-sex so-called ‘marriage’ will require the state to go into the business of assigning parents to a child – as opposed to only recording who the parents of a child are, as they do now. Once that line is crossed everyone’s children will become virtual wards of the state.
“Legalizing same-sex so-called ‘marriage’ will require the state to go into the business of assigning parents to a child – as opposed to only recording who the parents of a child are, as they do now. Once that line is crossed everyone’s children will become virtual wards of the state.”
The state is hardly assigning parents to children. If a woman has a baby with sperm from sperm bank and her partner and she want to raise it, there’s not much assigning for the state to do. If there are only two people who to raise a particular child, what’s left for the state to decide? Aren’t children more secure when they’re raised by married parents?
The state has far greater responsibility with straight couples, such as dealing with deadbeat dads, who won’t support their children.