MERGED--> Concerned Women for America + Mary Cheney is Pregnant - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-08-2006, 12:13 PM   #16
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:20 PM
eep.

sorry.

__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 12-08-2006, 01:37 PM   #17
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 05:20 PM
Quote:
Mary Cheney, 37, and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, 45,
37 and 45 and having a baby!?

No thank you.
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
Old 12-08-2006, 02:13 PM   #18
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:20 PM
and the two of them live in Virginia.

hopefully this will shed some light on the draconian homophobic amendment that just recently passed in VA (on a positive note, it passed with 56% of the vote, which is large, but nowhere near the 65% homophobic legislation was getting as little as 2 years ago, and the DC suburbs of NoVA resoundingly rejected the amendment).

in Virginia, there are now no legal protections AT ALL for Mary and Heather, and custody of the child will not be available to Heather should something happen to Mary. and Mary and/or Heather can both be fired for being gay.

and all that is FAR more damaging to a child than squealing about a lack of male role models.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 12-08-2006, 02:27 PM   #19
War Child
 
Shaliz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 666
Local Time: 08:20 PM
Re: Concerned Women for America

Quote:
"Love can't replace a mother and a father."
WTF?! You have got to be kidding me. So, an unloving, or even abusive, mother/father is better than a loving mother/mother or father/father or loving single parent or grandparent or any other conceivable scenario, for that matter? Wow! I can't believe someone could actually say that with a straight face....absolutely incredible, and very, very sad.
__________________
Shaliz is offline  
Old 12-09-2006, 01:38 AM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 08:20 PM
I'm concerned about a group like Concerned Mothers of America being concerned about something that is none of their concern.
__________________
sue4u2 is offline  
Old 12-09-2006, 11:10 AM   #21
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 09:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
in Virginia, there are now no legal protections AT ALL for Mary and Heather, and custody of the child will not be available to Heather should something happen to Mary. and Mary and/or Heather can both be fired for being gay.
When you're rich and powerful, laws are meaningless to you. Do you possibly think that Mary and Heather will ever have to deal with the kind of hardships that regular people have to deal with?

And that's probably why the Cheneys can sleep at night, knowing that they support a party of pure evil. They're really only concerned about themselves.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 05:35 PM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:20 PM
From a new interview in People Magazine

Loving soul ? Um, I think she's going to make a loving parent and mother. Maybe he was just trying to be poetic or something...

"The White House family had some happy news this week: Mary Cheney, the Vice President's daughter, is pregnant.


THE PRESIDENT: The Vice President took me aside and gave me the good news. He and his wife, Lynne, are very happy for Mary.

You said in 2005 that ideally "a child is raised in a married family with a man and a woman." Knowing Mary and her partner, Heather, do you still think that?

THE PRESIDENT: I think Mary is going to be a loving soul to her child. And I'm happy for her."

Check out the whole interview, he sleeps well too. Good for him

http://www.people.com/people/article...4374_1,00.html
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 05:38 PM   #23
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:20 PM
good for Bush.

seriously.

one suspects he's a closet tolerant.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 07:43 PM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:20 AM
What a bunch of hypocrisy.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 09:36 AM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:20 PM
(AP) Bush was asked about Mary Cheney's pregnancy in light of his previous statements that a child ideally should be raised by in a family headed by a married father and mother.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said on Friday that Bush has not changed his mind. "But he also believes that every human life is sacred and that every child who comes into this world deserves love," Snow said. "And he believes that Mary Cheney's child will, in fact, have loving parents."

Asked if Bush believes that children who are raised by gay and lesbian parents are at a disadvantage, Snow said, "He does not make comments on that and nor will I."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 06:13 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:20 PM
time.com

Two Mommies Is One Too Many
Mary Cheney is starting a family. Let's hope she doesn't start a trend
By JAMES C. DOBSON

A number of social conservatives, myself included, have recently been asked to respond to the news that Mary Cheney, the Vice President's daughter, is pregnant with a child she intends to raise with her lesbian partner. Implicit in this issue is an effort to get us to criticize the Bush Administration or the Cheney family. But the concern here has nothing to do with politics. It is about what kind of family environment is best for the health and development of children, and, by extension, the nation at large.

With all due respect to Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, the majority of more than 30 years of social-science evidence indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father. That is not to say Cheney and Poe will not love their child. But love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development. The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy--any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl.

The voices that argue otherwise tell us more about our politically correct culture than they do about what children really need. The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing. The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother." Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children." A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa.

According to educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, mothers tend to stress sympathy, grace and care to their children, while fathers accent justice, fairness and duty. Moms give a child a sense of hopefulness; dads provide a sense of right and wrong and its consequences. Other researchers have determined that boys are not born with an understanding of "maleness." They have to learn it, ideally from their fathers.

But set aside the scientific findings for a minute. Isn't there something in our hearts that tells us, intuitively, that children need a mother and a father? Admittedly, that ideal is not always possible. Divorce, death, abandonment and unwed pregnancy have resulted in an ever growing number of single-parent families in this culture. We admire the millions of men and women who have risen to the challenge of parenting alone and are meeting their difficult responsibilities with courage and determination. Still, most of them, if asked, would say that raising children is a two-person job best accomplished by a mother and father.

In raising these issues, Focus on the Family does not desire to harm or insult women such as Cheney and Poe. Rather, our conviction is that birth and adoption are the purview of married heterosexual couples. Traditional marriage is God's design for the family and is rooted in biblical truth. When that divine plan is implemented, children have the best opportunity to thrive. That's why public policy as it relates to families must be based not solely on the desires of adults but rather on the needs of children and what is best for society at large.

This is a lesson we should have learned from no-fault divorce. Because adults wanted to dissolve difficult marriages with fewer strings attached, reformers made it easier in the late 1960s to dissolve nuclear families. Though there are exceptions, the legacy of no-fault divorce is countless shattered lives within three generations, adversely affecting children's behavior, academic performance and mental and physical health. No-fault divorce reflected our selfish determination to do what was convenient for adults, and it has been, on balance, a disaster.

We should not enter into yet another untested and far-reaching social experiment, this one driven by the desires of same-sex couples to bear and raise children. The traditional family, supported by more than 5,000 years of human experience, is still the foundation on which the well-being of future generations depends.

Dobson is the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 06:14 PM   #27
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:20 PM
time.com

Two Mommies or Two Daddies Will Do Fine, Thanks
An advocate for gay families says James Dobson misuses science to discredit same-sex parenting
By JENNIFER CHRISLER

The strategies of religious and political extremists like James Dobson of Focus on the Family have become more nuanced of late. They have adjusted their language so that it is less vitriolic. They now utilize terms and approaches that often have a scientific-sounding overlay and are designed to appear more reasonable than those of their earlier efforts. They use the language of "concern" instead of the language of direct condemnation. They have had to make these adjustments because — as the lives of gay people and their families have gained visibility — the previous methods of attack lost their effectiveness. Nevertheless, the science they wield, if not unsound, is misconstrued. Responding to the news of the pregnancy of Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of the Vice President, Dobson, writing in a viewpoint in TIME magazine, put to work the time-worn tools of lies and distortion to make his argument that lesbian and gay parents are not able to provide environments for their children comparable in quality to those created by heterosexual parents.

These are the facts. According to the 2000 census, the vast majority — more than 75% — of American children, are being raised in families that differ in structure from two married, heterosexual parents and their biological children. We are a nation of blended and multi-generational families, adoptive and foster families, and families headed by single parents, divorced parents, unmarried parents, same-sex couples and more. Despite Dobson's assertions to the contrary, there is no single "traditional" family structure in the United States.

Moreover, despite Dobson's attempt to blame this reality on "no-fault divorce," this is not a new development. Over time and across cultures, the definition of family and the arrangements in which children have been raised have varied tremendously. Dobson's idea that the nuclear family is "supported by more than 5,000 years of human experience" and constitutes "the foundation on which the well-being of future generations depends" is simply not historically accurate.

Within his commentary, Dobson directly attributes some of the points of his argument to prominent psychologist and social researcher Dr. Carol Gilligan. However, when asked about his use of her research, Dr. Gilligan stated emphatically that its inclusion constitutes "a complete distortion of my work" and went on to say that there is nothing in her research that would support Dobson's stated conclusions.

It is true that there is 30 years of research about families headed by lesbian and gay parents. However, Dobson claims that the resulting data shows that "children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father." To say that Dobson is misinformed here would be inaccurate. He is simply lying. The people who are misinformed by these untruths are the readers of his material and those who publish his work without appropriately verifying his assertions. The fact is that research findings on these issues overwhelmingly testify to the success of gay families as nurturing environments for children's growth and development.

In terms of specific examples, Dr. Nanette Gartrell, former Harvard Medical School faculty and current Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology at the University of California, San Francisco, has conducted research on lesbian-headed families since the early 1980s. Gartrell's findings have proven that "in social and psychological development, the children [of lesbian parents] were comparable to children raised in heterosexual families." In addition, Dr. Charlotte Patterson, Professor of Psychology as the University of Virginia and respected family and child researcher, has determined that "there is no evidence that the development of children with lesbian or gay parents is compromised in any significant respect relative to that among children of heterosexual parents in otherwise comparable circumstances."

In addition, professional organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association and the National Association of Social Workers have all issued position statements supporting same-sex parents. The Child Welfare League of America says, "It should be recognized that sexual orientation and the capacity to nurture a child are separate issues." The American Psychological Association goes even further: "Not a single study has found children to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psycho-social growth. Gay and lesbian parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide healthy and supportive environments for their children."

The fundamental reality is that all parents, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, are linked in a very real way. We want our children to be safe, healthy and happy. When any of our families are politicized, it is an assault on our ability to protect ourselves, each other and our children. When people like Dobson profess "concern" for the welfare of children, while simultaneously attacking those very children's parents and family structures, their insincerity becomes evident. If their paramount focus is truly the health and well-being of children, then we invite Dobson and his colleagues to join our fight to ensure that all loving families are recognized, respected, protected and celebrated.

Jennifer Chrisler is the Executive Director of Family Pride, the nation's largest LGBT family advocacy group, and the mother of twin boys with her wife Cheryl Jacques. They reside in Washington, D.C.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 07:04 PM   #28
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen

Two Mommies Is One Too Many
Mary Cheney is starting a family. Let's hope she doesn't start a trend
By JAMES C. DOBSON
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 08:06 PM   #29
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:20 AM
James Dobson is just a fascist spewing pseudoscience. I don't think he really cares about families. It's all ego.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-02-2007, 09:35 AM   #30
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:20 PM
Interesting..

NY Times
February 1, 2007
Decision to Have Baby Isn’t Political, Mary Cheney Says
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, for the first time yesterday publicly defended her decision to become pregnant and asserted that same-sex couples were equally capable of raising children as heterosexual couples.

“When Heather and I decided to have a baby, it was not going to be the most popular decision ever,” Ms. Cheney said, referring to her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe.

She then gestured to her middle — any bulge disguised by a boxy jacket — and asserted: “This is a baby. This is a blessing from God. It is not a political statement. It is not a prop to be used in a debate by people on either side of an issue. It is my child.”

Ms. Cheney, 37, was speaking at Barnard College in Manhattan in a panel discussion sponsored by Glamour magazine. The baby, whose sex she has not revealed publicly, is due this spring and will be the sixth grandchild for the vice president and his wife.

Ms. Cheney, who is vice president for consumer advocacy at AOL and lives in Virginia, has not said how she became pregnant.

Her father became testy last week during a CNN interview when the host, Wolf Blitzer, asked what he thought of conservatives, specifically James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, who are critical of his daughter’s pregnancy. In refusing to answer, Mr. Cheney told his interviewer that he was “over the line.”

Ms. Cheney said in a brief interview after the panel discussion that she was not speaking for her father but that when she saw the CNN interview, she also felt Mr. Blitzer had crossed a line. “He was trying to get a rise out of my father,” she said.

The discussion took place in a parlor decorated with blowsy flower wallpaper and regal portraits of former Barnard presidents. Cindi Leive, the editor of Glamour, asked Ms. Cheney if she had anything to say to critics like Mr. Dobson.

He wrote in Time magazine in December that years of social research “indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father.” He also wrote that his group believes that “birth and adoption are the purview of married heterosexual couples.” Two of the researchers Mr. Dobson cited have complained that he distorted their views and said they disagreed with his conclusions.

Ms. Cheney agreed the research was distorted. “Every piece of remotely responsible research that has been done in the last 20 years on this issue has shown there is no difference between children who are raised by same-sex parents and children who are raised by opposite-sex parents,” she said. “What matters is that children are being raised in a stable, loving environment.”

The audience, of about 100 people, most of them Barnard students, applauded her warmly. So did her fellow panelists, including Gloria Feldt, the former president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Kathleen Turner, the actress.

The panel was titled “Success at 20, 30, 40,” and was held to provide material for the September issue of Glamour.

Ms. Cheney expressed some impatience with women who complain about the difficulties of “having it all,” noting that one of her forebears gave birth “in the back of a wagon and had no support system,” living in a tent on the oil fields outside of Casper, Wyo.

“I look at myself, I have a successful career, an incredible partner, we’re about to have a child, and we are incredibly fortunate in that we have the financial means to be able to do that,” she said. “But this notion that women today are overwhelmed with choices, my God, my grandmother would have killed to have these choices.”

Later, Ms. Cheney was asked whether she would support a woman for president. Ms. Cheney, asserting that she was not referring to anyone in particular — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s name was never uttered — said she would vote for the most qualified person and that voting for someone based on their sex was “absolutely foolish.”

Ms. Cheney is the author of “Now It’s My Turn: A Daughter’s Chronicle of Political Life,” published last year after she worked in her father’s re-election campaign. In the book, she wrote that she came “pretty close” to quitting when President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Ms. Leive asked her if she ever thought of calling up President Bush and telling him how she felt. Ms. Cheney said Mr. Bush “let it be known to me that if I wanted to put out a statement, talking about my position publicly, he would fully support it, he would recognize my right to dissent.” She said she did not do so because she was not the candidate.

She also said she continued working for the campaign because the idea of Senator John Kerry, the Democratic candidate, becoming president was “terrifying,” acknowledging that her view would probably not be a popular sentiment among the Barnard students.

Even if there were political differences with Ms. Cheney, several of them said after the panel that they found her sympathetic. Leslie Lipton, 20, said she thought Ms. Cheney should be able to have a baby if she wanted one and was raising the child in a loving home.

“I think people will take it as a political statement because she is so much in the public eye,” Ms. Lipton said. “But in an ideal world, it wouldn’t be political.”
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com