Monday, January 25, 2010

Bill Claims Mothers and Fathers are Unimportant

Last fall, during the statewide debate over domestic partnership, I participated in several debates discussing Referendum 71. In them, we discussed whether there is any difference between homosexual and heterosexual relationships. In support of my belief that there is, I repeatedly suggested that it is preferable for children to have both a mother and a father. To me this is self-evident, but some find it very offensive.

So, what should be done if the idea that mothers and fathers should be together offends you? Eliminate it, of course. That is exactly what HB 2793 does. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Lynn Kessler and co-sponsored by nine others, amends the Uniform Parentage Act to eliminate the term "father" or "mother" from Washington state law. The forbidden words would be replaced with the more inclusive term "parent".

This bill is much more significant than the words that would be changed. The state of Washington would be taking the position that moms and dads are interchangeable and neither is essential so long as one is there. Parents are just parents, six of one half-dozen of the other. It doesn't matter if you have one, two, or six. The important thing is just that kids have someone to love them.

These arguments resonate with the committed homosexual rights activists because their paradigm requires them to believe it. The rest of us realize the emperor has no clothes. The problem is that policy is being proposed by those who insist the emperor is well dressed. If this were a matter of personal preference, I could leave it alone. But it is not.

Outside the context of homosexual rights, making policy that suggests biological parents are replaceable and individually irrelevant is completely counterproductive. Fatherlessness is already a legitimate national disaster.

A recent study by the National Fatherhood Initiative found that the federal government spends $99.8 billion on programs that support father-absent homes. Children in father-absent homes are five times more likely to be poor. In 2002, 7.8 percent of children in married-couple families were living in poverty, compared to 38.4 percent of children in female-householder families.[1] A child with a nonresident father is 54 percent more likely to be poorer than his or her father.[2]

In light of this reality, does it make sense to imply that fathers aren't important?

The intent of the bill is to suggest that families with "parents" are no different than families with moms and dads. But in doing so, you diminish the importance of moms and dads. Considering the tremendous social costs associated with broken families that legislators are trying to fix, it is a schizophrenic thing to do.

[1]Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Children's Living Arrangements and Characteristics: March 2002, P200-547, Table C8. Washington D.C.: GPO, 2003.

[2]Source: Sorenson, Elaine and Chava Zibman. "Getting to Know Poor Fathers Who Do Not Pay Child Support." Social Service Review 75 (September 2001): 420-434.


  1. I would like to elaborate a bit further. I am a single mother of two children, whose father left our family to embrace the gay lifestyle. Now my children are forced by the courts to spend 40% of their time with their father and his partner in a community made up entirely of gay men. There are no children or mothers around. My children are the only little ones in the community!
    The courts saw no "harm" in placing two young children into a gay home or community. What is shocking to me, is that statistics show children raised in homosexual families are more likely to enter the lifestyle themselves. This proves the "nurture" of this behavior as learned and not innate - inborn. Secondly, the gay people group can NOT grow naturally. They must recruit, must brainwash, must push it upon the rest of society as legitmate in order for their people group to grow in numbers! So, it makes sense to create a counterfeit marriage and family in order to recruit through "nurturing." I am incredibly saddened by the movements justifications and explotations. A homosexual "family" can NEVER exist naturally ONLY through the destruction of a natural God designed family. My family was destroyed by divorce so that my former spouse could create a gay family with his partner. He now uses our children to create his gay family.
    To achieve their agenda of elevating their illegitimate relationships to equal status of marriage between a man and a woman they are using innocent children and placing them in harms way. Children are ultimately the TARGET of the gay movement! It is through the children being subject to homosexual families whether through adoption, divorce,or foster-care that they can teach innocent children that homosexually is natural and should be embraced. Once children accept this unnatural behavior as natural they will more easily embrace the lifestyle themselves. As these children embrace the lifestyle, the movements numbers grow! I believe this is truly at the heart of the gay movement and so why they are pushing extremely hard to redefine marriage, families and parents. This is the information that MUST get out to the general public!! The general public does not know this but are being completely brain washed to accept the aggressive tactics of the gay movement.

  2. Is there a companion senate bill that we should be writing our senators about?

  3. Hi Linda, as far as we have seen there is just the house bill. On our website we have a list of bills we are watching and if there is a companion bill for any of them we will let people know. Thank you for asking.