Gay rights groups celebrated a landmark court ruling yesterday, while family values groups said the decision to give a London boy two moms is an attack on the traditional family.My only reaction to this was...duh! Of course it's going to stir debate...between people who know what is right, and people who just want to promote their own "rights".
I know...I'm probably being a bit harsh there. But seriously.... a child having three parents? Where will that stop? 4, 5, 6 parents? who decides?
And as well evidenced already in this child's life....relationships falter, they end. Who then has the "right" to this child? Can you imagine how hard it is for a child to endure two people fighting over him/her, but three? How many directions does a child have to be pulled in?
I can see the value in having lots of caring people in a child's life. IF a person is genuinely concerned about a child's well-being, be involved. I'm just not so sure that, that person needs to be made a parent...even if they are living with mom's other half and dad is elsewhere. If dad is still in the picture and involved.... well then he's a parent!
I have to admit...I'm not sure what to do with a comment like this
"After three years of being in the court system, he's happy to have his son's reality recognized," Mamo said. "The decision reflects the dignity of the non-biological mother, which she deserves as a full participating parent in the family."Why is dignity involved? Why does her parenting need to be officially recognized to be seen as dignified? I don't know...but I think it begs the question... my boyo has lots of "aunties and uncles" and "grammas and grampas" at church, should their relationships be dignified by making them officially members of our extended family legally?
Quite frankly, I think anyone who puts the hours into parenting is already dignified. Anyone who genuinely cares about a child is already dignified. The rest is just legal stuff. Can live-in boyfriends and girlfriends now insist that they be seen as parents legally for the children they live with? They parent as well.
I don't know but I think this court decision just opens a whole can of worms that perhaps the judge did consider....or perhaps didn't care about. Afterall...he is just considering this case, and meeting the needs of this family. This judge met the needs of these individuals...and the rest... well apparently it doesn't matter.
"The court was able to find a solution in the situation where they acknowledge the legislation does not contemplate the circumstances," he said. "The reason we have a charter is to hold values of individuals as being higher than politics. These decisions are too important to be left to the whims of any particular party or consideration of the cabinet of the day."