Posted on 12/11/2006 3:55:47 PM PST by RWR8189
A number of social conservatives, myself included, have recently been asked to respond to the news that Mary Cheney, the Vice President's daughter, is pregnant with a child she intends to raise with her lesbian partner. Implicit in this issue is an effort to get us to criticize the Bush Administration or the Cheney family. But the concern here has nothing to do with politics. It is about what kind of family environment is best for the health and development of children, and, by extension, the nation at large.
With all due respect to Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, the majority of more than 30 years of social-science evidence indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father. That is not to say Cheney and Poe will not love their child. But love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development. The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy--any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl.
The voices that argue otherwise tell us more about our politically correct culture than they do about what children really need. The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing. The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother." Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children." A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa.
According to educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, mothers tend to stress sympathy, grace and care to their children, while fathers accent justice, fairness and duty. Moms give a child a sense of hopefulness; dads provide a sense of right and wrong and its consequences. Other researchers have determined that boys are not born with an understanding of "maleness." They have to learn it, ideally from their fathers.
But set aside the scientific findings for a minute. Isn't there something in our hearts that tells us, intuitively, that children need a mother and a father? Admittedly, that ideal is not always possible. Divorce, death, abandonment and unwed pregnancy have resulted in an ever growing number of single-parent families in this culture. We admire the millions of men and women who have risen to the challenge of parenting alone and are meeting their difficult responsibilities with courage and determination. Still, most of them, if asked, would say that raising children is a two-person job best accomplished by a mother and father.
In raising these issues, Focus on the Family does not desire to harm or insult women such as Cheney and Poe. Rather, our conviction is that birth and adoption are the purview of married heterosexual couples. Traditional marriage is God's design for the family and is rooted in biblical truth. When that divine plan is implemented, children have the best opportunity to thrive. That's why public policy as it relates to families must be based not solely on the desires of adults but rather on the needs of children and what is best for society at large.
This is a lesson we should have learned from no-fault divorce. Because adults wanted to dissolve difficult marriages with fewer strings attached, reformers made it easier in the late 1960s to dissolve nuclear families. Though there are exceptions, the legacy of no-fault divorce is countless shattered lives within three generations, adversely affecting children's behavior, academic performance and mental and physical health. No-fault divorce reflected our selfish determination to do what was convenient for adults, and it has been, on balance, a disaster.
We should not enter into yet another untested and far-reaching social experiment, this one driven by the desires of same-sex couples to bear and raise children. The traditional family, supported by more than 5,000 years of human experience, is still the foundation on which the well-being of future generations depends.
Dobson is the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family
And no problems with lesbian lovers having children?
I thought we needed more children.
How about the male whose sperm is producing this off spring
What a creep
Responsible for bring a child into the world and then taking NO responsibilty for its upbringing etc etc
yeah, religious people are such a bother. They always want to talk about values and some people strongly disagree with them. It is so disturbing.
Let's start a political movement to get rid of all religious people. We'll call it Communism. And then . . .
"Really? And I suppose you think fatherless homes are a good idea?"
I'm waiting for this answer also....waiting...waiting....
Is the issue so much two women raising a child together or that they are lesbians? What if a child were raised with a mom and dad at first, then something happened to dad? Then, let's supposed the child was going to be raised by his mom and a non-gay female relative? Is it different because dad was around for a while?
Would you address the article, instead of just throwing out ad hominem? It makes some important points, IMO.
What it is going to be a threesome with the sperm donor gettin one weekend a month
It is called being selfish because in your case you present it wasn't known the father wouldn't be there
Sometimes Torie the truth hurts.
Get over it.
What about if there was a lovely lady,who was bringing up three very lovely girls. (All of them had hair of gold, like their mother. The youngest one in curls.)
And then there was a man man named Brady. Who was busy with three boys of his own. They were four men, living all together. Yet they were all alone.
But one day the lady met this fellow. And they knew that it was much more than a hunch. That this group would somehow form a family.
That's the way they all became the Brady Bunch.
"One Dobson is one too many."
An intelligent rebuttal to his statements.
People..think about it...A human borne from a turkey baster and a petrie dish. Not from a physical union of love, and definately not as God or the Universe intended.
You must agree this is the ultimate act of selfishness right??
I don't know - you are the one that said he was not taking responsibility, now is that in the article, do you have inside information, or are you just making it up?
Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!
Definately not as God or the Universe intended.
Then why did he allow for the invention of petrie dishes and turkey basters?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.