Posted on 12/11/2006 3:55:47 PM PST by RWR8189
"What is ideal" is exceedingly rare even among his two-parent heterosexual couples. As soon as folks decided to open the door to fertility medicine including in-vitro, all bets were off. Gov't has no authority to determine who can reproduce and who cannot. It's a double-edge sword. There are "welfare queens" who shouldn't, crack whores who produce damaged children without any concern, murderous "postpartum depression" witches who escape justice, convicted child molesters... and yet Dobson wants a devoted couple with ample means to be unable to bring up a child. How would he accomplish this?
You can advocate against it or any consequential activity but how it is there's never any alternative offered beyond submitting to a kind of brainwashing to "fix" one's sexuality? Want to give a displaced child a home? Not if you're homosexual. Want to teach? Not if you're homosexual. Want to reproduce? Not if you're homosexual. Want to devote your life to another? Not if you're homosexual.
Without affirming alternatives in keeping with the American spirit of valuing life and liberty how do you hope to inspire or persuade to your viewpoint?
The process ex-reverand Haggard is undertaking with his counselors, shrinks and lie detector tests would be unacceptable to every American in his own life and yet so many would say to their homosexual child or neighbor, "That's what you should do!" The same folk who are greatly skeptical of modern psychology and rightly dismissive of its claimed ability to deal with child predators somehow are ready to swallow whole the idea of a malleable homosexual-to-heterosexual identity, a rewriting of self at a fundamental level.
Sounds like a future South Park episode!
Would you have advocated Mary being taken from Lynn and Dick Cheney when it became evident she had lesbian inclinations? She could've been sent off to a reparatory therapy reeducation camp then turned over to a mother-father couple who was not as defective as the Cheneys must've been by causing a lesbian daughter.
If we really believe in individual liberty, what choice is there to do otherwise? The alternative in post #76 to forcibly remove children from homosexual couples, including Poe + Cheney is an affront to fundamental American values.
A friend of mine was killed in an accident and left behind his one year old son and wife. What would you tell her? You can't have your son, give it to a two-parent heterosexual couple? Hurry up and find a new daddy for the boy?
I'm just trying to bring the real world into his argument, if he is looking for a solution/compromise. Statistics I read suggest that most households consist of people who are not married. Some common ground has to be found in my opinion. As an example, a friend of mine had her first child at 41 after getting married (for the first time) at 40. I was discussing children with a young female college student who had had two children in high school. She asked me why my friend waited so long to have a baby. I said "Well, she didn't get married until she was 40." The girl's response was a confused "So?" And she really didn't get it, the idea of waiting until marriage to have a baby just didn't make a connection in her young mind, not even as a quaint custom of times gone by. It is that type of mindset that I think we need to reach, and I don't see Dobson's argument doing that. Of course his intent may be "preaching to the choir".
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.In short, I don't think his intent is to proffer unsolicited pablum that satisfies only those too "egalitarian" to articulate any view of right and wrong. I think his intent is to state his belief about the situation IN QUESTION, and his opinion about what has led society's children to this dilemma. To obfuscate his thesis with pleasantries designed to reach "certain mindsets" would probably muddy it sufficiently that they would miss the point anyway.
Actually I told the girl that in my day, and among the people with whom I am friends, and according to the teachings of my church, one waited until AFTER marriage to have a child. The girl looked at me like I was describing life on another planet.
I guess insofar as Dobson's goal is to merely state his beliefs and not actually call for any kind of action he did accomplish that. Maybe that is all that can be done now, to be a voice in the wilderness. He is not a poltician, is not trying to enter the conversation of public policy, but is reinforcing the strength of his flock.
This is NOT what he is advocating and neither would I. I was a single mother for a time and God expected me to raise my children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, which I tried to do. Single parenting is rough and a mother who has no husband needs to find a good male role model for her children, just as a father who has no wife needs to find a good female role model for his children. Men need to mentor boys and women need to mentor girls to give them a balance. I'm not talking about running out and finding a husband or a wife. I'm talking about having a man or woman in your life, perhaps an uncle, brother, sister, father, mother, etc. (or a decent neighbor or church friend) who can help mentor a child, include him or her in their activities, take them places with their own children. It CAN be done. People need to help one another like we used to years ago.
This is NOT what he is advocating and neither would I. I was a single mother for a time and God expected me to raise my children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, which I tried to do. Single parenting is rough and a mother who has no husband needs to find a good male role model for her children, just as a father who has no wife needs to find a good female role model for his children. Men need to mentor boys and women need to mentor girls to give them a balance. I'm not talking about running out and finding a husband or a wife. I'm talking about having a man or woman in your life, perhaps an uncle, brother, sister, father, mother, etc. (or a decent neighbor or church friend) who can help mentor a child, include him or her in their activities, take them places with their own children. It CAN be done. People need to help one another like we used to years ago.
He's against homosexuality because God calls it an abomination. It's not God's finest plan for our lives. He created Adam and Eve to be parents, not Adam and Steve or Mary and Annie. He's not against HER, but against her lifestyle choice. If she came to him and asked for help, I KNOW he would help her. It's not that she's a single parent. It's that she's in a homosexual relationship and having a child being brought up by two mommies.
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.