Posted on 03/03/2013 4:58:50 PM PST by Sub-Driver
DOJ: Children Do Not Need—and Have No Right to--Mothers March 3, 2013 By Terence P. Jeffrey
Georgetown Law School. (AP Photo/Haraz Ghanbari) (CNSNews.com) - The Obama Justice Department is arguing in the United States Supreme Court that children do not need mothers.
The Justice Department’s argument on the superfluity of motherhood is presented in a brief the Obama administration filed in the case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended California’s Constitution to say that marriage involves only one man and one woman.
The Justice Department presented its conclusions about parenthood in rebutting an argument made by proponents of Proposition 8 that the traditional two-parent family, led by both a mother and a father, was the ideal place, determined even by nature itself, to raise a child.
The Obama administration argues this is not true. It argues that children need neither a father nor a mother and that having two fathers or two mothers is just as good as having one of each.
“The [California] Voter Guide arguably offered a distinct but related child-rearing justification for Proposition 8: 'the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father,’” said the administration’s brief submitted to the court by Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr.
“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,” the Department of Justice told the court. “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...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
It would take war. That's what ALL-OUT mobilizes the society against an enemy. Congress won't even declare war against a foreign enemy.... how'z it ever going to declare war against a domestic one?
So sad....and how far from God we have gone. Mothers are very important in a child’s life
Like “Brave New World” Amazing...and scary!
Is this the same type of scientific literature that supposedly supports GoreBull Warming, the banning of DDT and other scientific theories of the moment?
A true family has a Father and a Mother, until the Homo's can self reproduce without outside help, it should remain so.
The Left has long since decided that children do not need fathers, and have created subcultures where there are none.
A careful reading of the studies show that apples to apples comparisons are rarely made. Typically what the studies show, if you can believe them at all, is that with all of the benefits of wealth and status the children of rich white lesbian couples do no better than those of minority single mothers.
Only in that sense are heterosexual and homosexual parents similarly beneficial...in that for the examples given, both are starting the children off in a deep hole.
For generations, we have given the State the power to create artificial persons, in the form of corporations, foundations, trusts and the like. Nobody is confused by this government-defined fiction. We know that a corporation is not a real human person.
Another government-defined fiction that we have allowed for generations is that the State can also define “marriage” and who is “married” and who is not. But marriage predates any State because it is God who defines not any State. Indeed, any “marriage” a State defines is just as much a legal fiction as when it tells us that a corporation is a “person” that has freedom of speech.
The State attempts to force us to recognize its power. One way is to presume the power to define who is married and who is not. We cede this power in part because we allow the State to tax incomes and estates. To administer such taxing power, the State must define who it considers to be “married” and who is not. Just as when it defines a corporation to be a “person”, as silly as this would be to God, the State does not hesitate to define anyone it pleases as being “married”, totally apart from how God would define them. Sadly, even ministers allow the State’s definition of marriage to be the controlling definition.
Jesus, who was recognized as a prophet by all three monotheistic religions, is quoted in Matthew chapter 19 that from the beginning of humanity, it was God’s intent that marriage would only be one man and one woman. Scripture in many ways and places also tells us that God defines sexual morality and that people who refuse to practice that His morality simply do not qualify for His freely given gift of eternal life. (for example, see Ephesians chapter 5). Of course, people are free to believe whatever they want, but that does not change what God clearly said to us.
If you review the arguments advanced by supporters of same-sex marriage (like at HRC.ORG), you will find that many of them are related to taxation, inheritance and medical issues, all issues controlled by the State. But existing law addresses those and any defects in the law can be easily repaired apart from the issue of “marriage”.
I don’t want a government that can tell me what I may or may not do in the privacy of my own home or relationships. In a secular Constitutional Republic with a provision that prohibits Congress from making any law respecting religion, I have to allow others to have their own beliefs and morality. I can only be an advocate for the morality and beliefs that I think are true. I take my understanding of sexual morality from Scripture and that is where I learn that God considers sodomy to be an abomination to Him.
If a State decides that two (or more) people can marry, if that is all that happened, I could live with that because I don’t have to approve, change my beliefs or what beliefs I pass on to my children.
However, once gays and their supporters have sufficient influence with a State to redefine marriage, they don’t stop there. They use the State to forbid me from acting on my morality and beliefs. In fact, the State in some cases forces me to accommodation in their practices.
If I have children in public school, the State will insist on teaching them that gay marriage is just as normal as God’s definition of marriage. You will be sanctioned as a parent if you attempt to remove your children from such indoctrination. As long as they are enrolled in government-controlled schools, they will be graded on how well they accept the State’s idea of normal, or refuse to reject God’s idea of normal.
If you run a business that could provide services to the public, you will be sanctioned if you decline to treat gays as non-gays. For example, if you run a wedding photography business, you will be sanctioned if you decline to photograph a gay wedding. This has already happened in California and New Mexico [1].
You may lose control of your own property. [2]
You might have to go out of business to stay true to your principles, so as to avoid being fined or sued into bankruptcy. [3,4]
From the article:
“Wedding vendors elsewhere who refused to accommodate same-sex couples have faced discrimination lawsuits — and lost. Legal experts said Discover Annapolis Tours sidesteps legal trouble by avoiding all weddings.
“If they’re providing services to the public, they can’t discriminate who they provide their services to,” said Glendora Hughes, general counsel for the Maryland Commission on Civil Rights. The commission enforces public accommodation laws that prohibit businesses from discriminating on the basis of race, sexual orientation and other characteristics.”
To advance the legal case that a marriage between two people of the same sex is no different than a marriage as God defines it, the US Justice Department will base arguments before the Supreme Court that a child does not need, nor have a right to a mother. [5]
In short, gays will demand that non-gays accept them as moral equals, which they are not and cannot be. When the State says they are equal it is forbidden for a private citizen to dissent from that status. In doing so, they seek to force me to give them approval for something that I will never approve of. It is that last point that galls gays the most.
Curiously, when advocates of gay marriage are asked if their policy also would allow polygamy or polyandry, they recoil in horror and insist that it does not. However, logic demands that it does. I would ask how same-sex parents are going to react in the future when, for example, Utah public schools officials require that teachers instruct the children that LDS-related polygamy is just as “normal” as same-sex “marriage”. The fact that this will be an issue will show yet again that gay “marriage” is not about marriage at all it is about forcing the rest of us to approve of repugnant sexual immorality, something that LDS polygamists never demanded.
[1] Refusing To Shoot Gay Marriage Is Discrimination, Says New Mexico Appeals Court
http://www.popphoto.com/news/2012/06/refusing-to-shoot-gay-marriage-discrimination-says-new-mexico-appeals-court
[2] Judge Rules Christian facility cannot ban same-sex civil union ceremony on its own premises
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/judge-rules-christian-facility-cannot-ban-same-sex-civil-union-ceremony-on
[3] Opposed to same-sex marriage, company ends wedding business
Trolley owner says move made to avoid potential lawsuit
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-ar-annapolis-trolley-suspends-wedding-servic-20121225,0,7100399,full.story
[4] Baker refuses to make wedding cake for lesbian couple and ‘calls them abominations unto the Lord’
Aaron Klein, owner of Sweet Cakes in Gresham, Oregon is the subject of a state investigation after one of the brides-to-be filed a complaint
[5] DOJ: Children Do Not Need—and Have No Right to—Mothers March 3, 2013 By Terence P. Jeffrey
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-children-do-not-need-and-have-no-right-mothers
Welcome to the Borg collective.
>> How far we have fallen when our government argues this abomination.
And it only took 4 short, lying years.
The Marxist scumbags didn’t run on this platform, and too many were too ignorant to notice the setup in the first term.
It’s my belief, however, that this evil is not sustainable, and Hell will turn on the dirtbags attempting to destroy this Country.
Yep, LBJ set up the great society to require families to divest the husband to get welfare. Now bh0 is declaring that mothers aren’t needed and that same sex families are his preferred group. On might think that he didn’t notice that it takes male and female to reproduce off spring when he and mooshell did their thing.
>> Yeah, that’s why “Mommy!” is so often heard from the severely injured, well into adulthood.
Yup.
Yeah, it's scary, but it can't last. The type of system the hard left is trying to create, is completely unsustainable, and has crashed and burned everywhere it's ever been tried.
Eventually, the thing just breaks when the productive class quits producing. The people revolt, and the adults return to power. From that point forward, the public rejects leftist ideals as the destructive policies they truly are.
I think we're witnessing these children playing out their deepest fantasies in real life right now, but their dream will soon come to an end, as all juvenile dreams do.
Considering all that has been going on in our country under democrat rule, I have trouble imagining what Satan would do differently.
The Beast must be proud.
Sweden is pressuring mothers to take their 18 month old children to day care. This should be expected to be coming here soon, Sweden has been the testing ground for many radical ideas for a long time.
“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,” says the administration.
>>>>neverdem has the refutation of this lie laid out completely. I pray one of the Supreme Court clerks is freeping.
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/regnerus/index?tab=articles
It seems to me that the only way we’re going to dispense with modern feminism is to give women what they want.... good and hard.
Including:
1. Forced family planning, ala China. Tom Friedman of the NYT is all warm and fuzzy about this. eg, a woman comes into an abortion clinic for her second abortion... how about we throw in a free tubal ligation on top of that for her?
2. Given equal rights to men under “domestic violence” acts. At least 40% of “domestic violence” is perpetrated by women. I’d like to see the presumption that a man started the crap come to an end in the law, and the difference in treatment under the law come to an end. I’d like to see women who take out restraining orders against men lose their rights to own guns just as the men do, and at the same time - because a RO isn’t worth anything without reciprocation.
3. Where is the presumption that the mother is the better parent rooted in reality? If the husband has the higher income and is a more stable individual, then he should be granted primary custody on no other basis than these.
I’m not in a “pit.” I’m happy to give people what they claim they want... good and hard. Usually after so doing, people start to STFU and stop clamoring for legislation, which is my ultimate goal.
For example: Women in infantry. I’m all for it. Make it mandatory that X% of female volunteers serve in infantry MOS’s. Force them to hump ammo, mortar base plates, serve on tank crews and get down in the mud and slush to repair tank tracks. Give them what they want, good and hard. Force them to enroll for conscription... or lose their college aid from the Feds. Give them the full measure of what they claim they want. After about 10 years, I’d fully expect the feminists to STFU, because the results will be in and counted, and they won’t be pretty.
The object here is should be to marginalize and discredit the modern screeching harpies that call themselves “feminists” for all time.
I agree, my FRiend.
I was raised and taught the difference between good and evil and being an optimist believe that good will prevail.
There's no doubt at all that evil is in the hearts of Obama and this administration.
bump
Far beyond sickening. Our own government, arguing that “scientific studies” show two daddies or two mommies is just as good as Mom & Dad. What has happened to our nation? God save us.
The Nazis and Soviet communists hid behind “scientific studies” to justify their evils, too. Can a US genocide be that many years away? Unlike such previous genocides, this one won’t be directed at intellectuals and homosexuals, the infirm, the retarded or the elderly. It will be directed at God fearing Christian conservatives who cherish liberty and freedom.
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.