Here's something I posted early on in my contributions to The Opine Editorials...
Dr. Amy Tuteur, a Harvard and Boston University-educated obstetrician-gynecologist, wrote a piece on Salon.com entitled "Are Fathers Optional?" Since she answers in the negative, affirming the importance of fathers, there have been some very passionate responses that you can click through to see. It seems like it should be self-evident that both mother and fathers are necessary for children, and thus, raising the next generation in the best social conditions possible. Sadly, because this is not affirming of some of the desires and choices of some adults (especially some unilateralists, feminists, male hedonists, and some homosexual people) it is treated as a controversial idea.
Dr. Amy Tuteur, a Harvard and Boston University-educated obstetrician-gynecologist, wrote a piece on Salon.com entitled "Are Fathers Optional?" Since she answers in the negative, affirming the importance of fathers, there have been some very passionate responses that you can click through to see. It seems like it should be self-evident that both mother and fathers are necessary for children, and thus, raising the next generation in the best social conditions possible. Sadly, because this is not affirming of some of the desires and choices of some adults (especially some unilateralists, feminists, male hedonists, and some homosexual people) it is treated as a controversial idea.
Judging by their behavior, American women appear to think that fathers are optional. According to the recently published birth statistics (Births: Final Data for 2006), the proportion of births to unmarried women has reached 38.5%, the highest rate ever recorded.That's an average. Some groups often portrayed as disadvantaged have a much higher rate, unfortunately, which helps perpetuate disadvantages in those populations.
Women are actively conceiving and bearing children in the knowledge that their fathers will almost certainly not be living with them throughout childhood. Simply put, women are behaving as if fathers are optional. Nothing could be further from the truth. Having an active, involved, resident father is the birth right of every child. It is not the birth right of every mother to have children simply because she wants them.I urge you to click through and read the whole piece. It isn't very long. The M.D. does participate in the comments thread, responding to objections and challenges – most of which are typical. Some examples of some of her replies to the critics:
Actually I believe that women should we stigmatized if they want to have children without marriage, because it is a self indulgent, selfish choice... Hetero is normative. That doesn't mean the gay is unacceptable, but let's not get ridiculous... I can understand why a woman would want a child, but I cannot understand a woman putting what she wants ahead of what a child needs... We can debate the research findings and they are important, but my argument is primarily a moral argument. All children have a mother and father, but in the case of gay couples the biological parent substitutes someone he or she likes better. That may be nice for the biological parent, but it is not fair to the child... I realize that placing children's needs above parents' wants is not politically correct. That's because, in our society, children are treated like accessories, not like actual human beings... Sorry, the fact that some people are horrible parents does not give you the moral right to be a mediocre parent, or, indeed, anything except the best parent that you can be... If the mother and father cannot commit to being permanently resident in that child's life, they shouldn't have a child.And that's just a small sampling. I wonder if she'd like to join this blog? ;-) H/T: Glenn Sacks
No comments:
Post a Comment
I always welcome comments. Be aware that anything you write may be thoroughly analyzed and used in subsequent blog entries.