California’s 2008 ballot measure, Proposition 8, which outlawed same-sex marriage in the not-so Golden State, argued that the traditional two-parent family, led by both a mother and a father, was the ideal place – determined by nature itself – to raise a child. Sounds right to me. But, to O? Not so much.
Moreover, the Regime argues that children don’t even need mothers. Or fathers. More on that later.
In August 2011, a federal district judge found that Proposition 8 violated the equal protection rights of same-sex couples. In February 2012, a federal appeals court declared that Proposition 8 violated the 14th Amendment by discriminating against gays and lesbians, all but ensuring that the case will proceed to the Supreme Court. That’s where O comes in – once against ramping up pressure on SCOTUS to rule in the Regime’s favor.
In a brief submitted to the Court by O’s Solicitor General, Donald Verrilli, Jr., DOJ argues the following:
“As an initial matter, no sound basis exists for concluding that same-sex couples who have committed to marriage are anything other than fully capable of responsible parenting and child-rearing.
To the contrary, many leading medical, psychological, and social-welfare organizations have issued policy statements opposing restrictions on gay and lesbian parenting based on their conclusion, supported by numerous scientific studies, that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.
The weight of the scientific literature strongly supports the view that same-sex parents are just as capable as opposite-sex parents.”
Really? From cnsnews.com:
To support this argument, one of the documents the administration cites is a “policy statement” by the American Psychological Association. This statement claims that some studies indicate same-sex parents might be “superior” to mother-and-father families, but then concedes there is little actual data on the results of raising children in two-father households.
The Obama administration further argues that because California law already permits domestic partnerships in which same-sex couples are allowed all the “incidents” of marriage – including the right to adopt children and be foster parents – Proposition 8 only denies same-sex couples the use of the word “marriage” and does not change the status of child-rearing in the state.
So far, in the history of the human race, no child has ever been born without a biological father and mother. Now, in the Supreme Court of the United States, the Executive Branch of the federal government is arguing that, regardless of the biological facts of parenthood, states have no legitimate and defensible interest in ensuring that children conceived by a mother and a father are in fact raised by mothers and fathers. Continue reading…
Whether or not same-sex couples are “fully capable of responsible parenting and child-rearing,” is it really conceivable that a child properly raised in a traditional home does not benefit from the unique differences in relationships with both a mother and a father? Of course, not.
Call me a right-wing nut – but that’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it.