Around March of 2013 I came across the words of a prominent LGBT activist named Masha Gessen:
I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.
Imagine having five parents! Here’s what it means: it means going back and forth between all those households on a regular basis, never having a single place to call home during your most tender and vulnerable years. It means having divided Christmases, other holidays, and birthdays–you spend one with one parent, and another with the other parent, never spending a single holiday or birthday with both parents. Imagine having each of your parents completely ignore the other half of you, the other half of your family, as if it did not even exist. Meanwhile, imagine each parent pouring their energy into their new families and creating a unified home for their new children. These experiences give you the definite impression of being something leftover, something not quite part of them. You live like that on a daily basis for 18+ years.
As a child, would you choose a family structure advocated by Masha Gessen? Does this look fun?
I don’t have to imagine, because I had five parents. I had five parents because my mom and dad divorced when I was about three; my mom remarried once and my dad remarried twice. So I had a mom and two step-moms, and a dad and one step-dad. In this day and age children can already have five parents. That’s how badly marriage has deteriorated already. The main difference between what Gessen advocates and my experience is that my step parents were not legal parents; she advocates for all of the adults in her situation to be legal parents.
By Jennifer Thieme
, CP Op-Ed Contributor and Director of Finance & Advancement for the Ruth Institute.
Note: Ms. Thieme’s initial column on Log Cabin Republicans and Abraham Lincoln can be seen here. Gregory T. Angelo of the Log Cabin Republicans responded with a column that can be read here.
The Log Cabin Republicans did not address the central point I made, which is how same sex marriage changes the status between parents and their children. The claims for “marriage equality” pale in comparison to the vast transfer of authority from natural families to the state. It’s a case of the good being the enemy of the best. Read more…
DENVER (AP) — A gay couple is pursuing a discrimination complaint against a Colorado bakery, saying the business refused them a wedding cake to honor their Massachusetts ceremony, and alleging that the owners have a history of turning away same-sex couples.
As more states move to legalize same-sex marriage and civil unions, the case highlights a growing tension between gay rights advocates and supporters of religious freedom. Read more…
By Jennifer Roback Morse
This article was first published May 9, 2013, at americanthinker.com.
You have no doubt heard the news that gay marriage is inevitable. The New York state legislature redefined marriage in 2011. Rhode Island redefined marriage earlier this week. Delaware just removed the gender requirement from marriage. Minnesota is poised to vote on the issue this week. This steady drumbeat of state legislatures changing the definition of marriage as it has been known for millennia surely must show that so-called gay marriage is inevitable. Read more…
Categories: Jennifer Roback Morse, Marriage Equality, Marriage Legalities, Marriage Redefinition, Newsletter articles, Politics & Marriage, Same Sex Marriage genderless marriage, marriage equality, Marriage Redefinition, politics and marriage, Same Sex Marriage
This week, we started something BIG… but we’re only getting started!
Click here right away to sign NOM’s Marriage Petition to the Supreme Court!
On Tuesday, thousands of people rallied in Washington DC, marching in front of the Supreme Court in support of the true definition of marriage: the exclusive and faithful union of one man and one woman!
NOM brought together a coalition of over 40 groups in support of this effort and it has already made a tremendous impact! We met our opponents on the street in front of the Supreme Court, but thanks to the brave individuals who came out in support of marriage on Tuesday, the UK Daily Mail was able to report that we “easily outnumber[ed] advocates for gay marriage.” Read more…
Institute for Marriage and Public Policy , Harvey C. Mansfield and Leon R. Kass
The case rests squarely on sociology and psychology. How reliable can this be, ask two distinguished scholars.
Today the US Supreme Court begins hearings on two same-sex marriage cases. Scores of organisations have presented “amicus briefs” to the Court as background to the legal arguments. Here we present an edited version of a submission by the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy and two distinguished scholars. Leon Kass, of the University of Chicago, and Harvey Mansfield, of Harvard University, are experts on the limits of the scientific method and on issues relevant to the appropriate structure of family life. This is a long but extremely valuable contribution to the debate over same-sex marriage. Read more…
Marriage supporters to rally in Washington, D.C., on March 26 as Supreme Court hears cases
by John Burger
Supporters of both traditional marriage and same-sex unions will converge on the nation’s capital this week as the Supreme Court takes up two cases that could do to marriage what Roe v. Wade did to unborn human life.
The National Organization for Marriage is holding a March for Marriage on Tuesday morning, March 26, as the high court hears oral arguments in the first case, a challenge to California’s Proposition 8, which changed that state’s constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Arguments are expected to be heard the next day in a case contesting the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Read more…
by William W. Beach and Ryan T. Anderson
This article was first published March 13, 2013 at thepublicdiscourse.com.
Good public policy can meet the needs of all Americans without redefining marriage.
When the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) later this month, many casual observers will focus on what they call the fairness of redefining marriage. Interestingly, though, the dispute at the heart of the DOMA case could have been avoided had Congress enacted fairer tax reform years ago. Read more…