MERGED--> Concerned Women for America + Mary Cheney is Pregnant
- Thread starter deep
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
redhotswami
Blue Crack Addict
Wow. So now they are torn. Will they tell her not to keep the child??? 
That "Love can't replace a mother and a father." is the most idiotic statement I have ever read. She doesn't know what love is. She can't confine it to her homophobic shaped box!!!!
That "Love can't replace a mother and a father." is the most idiotic statement I have ever read. She doesn't know what love is. She can't confine it to her homophobic shaped box!!!!
dazzlingamy
Refugee
"Love can't replace a mother and a father."
This bitch needs a fucking kick to the head for saying absolutely pathetic statements like this. How dare she presume in her warped mind that the best love comes from a mother and a father. There are PLENTY of fucked up people on this world who had a mum and dad at home, so what hers excuse for them??
This bitch needs a fucking kick to the head for saying absolutely pathetic statements like this. How dare she presume in her warped mind that the best love comes from a mother and a father. There are PLENTY of fucked up people on this world who had a mum and dad at home, so what hers excuse for them??
Dreadsox said:
It's a large article, but here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservative
By the way, the founder of CWA happens to be the wife of the author of the "Left Behind" series.
A surprise, perhaps, but when are we ever truly surprised these days?
indra
ONE love, blood, life
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 12,689
Concerned Women for America. Doesn't that name just scream "We're stupid AND mean"?
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
indra said:Concerned Women for America. Doesn't that name just scream "We're stupid AND mean"?
To me it screams "busybody who is pretending to be 'concerned' about others when the only real 'concern' is feeling morally superior to others."
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
Concerned Women for America is a bunch of idiots.
Varitek
Blue Crack Addict
Not quite this topic, but I don't think it's worth starting a new thread.
I've been wondering about the Cheneys' comments about how they eagerly await their 6th grandchild, etc. If Cheney's daughter's partner was the one having the baby, would they still say that?
I've been wondering about the Cheneys' comments about how they eagerly await their 6th grandchild, etc. If Cheney's daughter's partner was the one having the baby, would they still say that?
OP
OP
deep
Blue Crack Addict
no
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Mary Cheney is pregnant
how dare she bring a fatherless child into the world and engage in behavior that George Bush stated should be made illegal as recently as 1999!?!?!?!
[q]Groups Mixed on Mary Cheney's Pregnancy
By DAVID CRARY
The Associated Press
Wednesday, December 6, 2006; 9:09 PM
NEW YORK -- Conservative leaders voiced dismay Wednesday at news that Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Dick Cheney, is pregnant, while a gay-rights group said the vice president faces "a lifetime of sleepless nights" for serving in an administration that has opposed recognition of same-sex couples.
Mary Cheney, 37, and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, 45, are expecting a baby in late spring, said Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for the vice president.
"The vice president and Mrs. Cheney are looking forward with eager anticipation" to the arrival of their sixth grandchild, McBride said.
Mary Cheney was an aide to her father during the 2004 campaign, and now is vice president for consumer advocacy at AOL. She and Poe moved from Colorado to Virginia a year ago to be closer to the Cheney family.
Family Pride, which advocates on behalf of gay and lesbian families, noted that Virginia last month became one of 27 states with a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
"Unless they move to a handful of less restrictive states, Heather will never be able to have a legal relationship with her child," said Family Pride executive director Jennifer Chrisler.
The couple "will quickly face the reality that no matter how loved their child will be. ... he or she will never have the same protections that other children born to heterosexual couples enjoy," Chrisler said. "Grandfather Cheney will no doubt face a lifetime of sleepless nights as he reflects on the irreparable harm he and his administration have done to the millions of American gay and lesbian parents and their children."
For years, Mary Cheney's openness about her sexual orientation had posed a dilemma for conservative activists who admire Dick Cheney's stance on many issues but consider homosexuality a sin.
Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America described the pregnancy as "unconscionable."
"It's very disappointing that a celebrity couple like this would deliberately bring into the world a child that will never have a father," said Crouse, a senior fellow at the group's think tank. "They are encouraging people who don't have the advantages they have."
Crouse said there was no doubt that the news would, in conservatives' eyes, be damaging to the Bush administration, which already has been chided by some leaders on the right for what they felt was halfhearted commitment to anti-abortion and anti-gay-rights causes in this year's general election.
Carrie Gordon Earll, a policy analyst for the conservative Christian ministry Focus on the Family, expressed empathy for the Cheney family but depicted the newly announced pregnancy as unwise.
"Just because you can conceive a child outside a one-woman, one-man marriage doesn't mean it's a good idea," said. "Love can't replace a mother and a father."
The vice president's office declined to elaborate on the circumstances of Mary Cheney's pregnancy.
The news was welcomed by the president of the largest national gay-rights group, Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign.
"Mary and Heather's decision to have a child is an example that families in America come in all different shapes and sizes," he said. "The bottom line is that a family is made up of love and commitment."[/q]
how dare she bring a fatherless child into the world and engage in behavior that George Bush stated should be made illegal as recently as 1999!?!?!?!
[q]Groups Mixed on Mary Cheney's Pregnancy
By DAVID CRARY
The Associated Press
Wednesday, December 6, 2006; 9:09 PM
NEW YORK -- Conservative leaders voiced dismay Wednesday at news that Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Dick Cheney, is pregnant, while a gay-rights group said the vice president faces "a lifetime of sleepless nights" for serving in an administration that has opposed recognition of same-sex couples.
Mary Cheney, 37, and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, 45, are expecting a baby in late spring, said Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for the vice president.
"The vice president and Mrs. Cheney are looking forward with eager anticipation" to the arrival of their sixth grandchild, McBride said.
Mary Cheney was an aide to her father during the 2004 campaign, and now is vice president for consumer advocacy at AOL. She and Poe moved from Colorado to Virginia a year ago to be closer to the Cheney family.
Family Pride, which advocates on behalf of gay and lesbian families, noted that Virginia last month became one of 27 states with a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
"Unless they move to a handful of less restrictive states, Heather will never be able to have a legal relationship with her child," said Family Pride executive director Jennifer Chrisler.
The couple "will quickly face the reality that no matter how loved their child will be. ... he or she will never have the same protections that other children born to heterosexual couples enjoy," Chrisler said. "Grandfather Cheney will no doubt face a lifetime of sleepless nights as he reflects on the irreparable harm he and his administration have done to the millions of American gay and lesbian parents and their children."
For years, Mary Cheney's openness about her sexual orientation had posed a dilemma for conservative activists who admire Dick Cheney's stance on many issues but consider homosexuality a sin.
Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America described the pregnancy as "unconscionable."
"It's very disappointing that a celebrity couple like this would deliberately bring into the world a child that will never have a father," said Crouse, a senior fellow at the group's think tank. "They are encouraging people who don't have the advantages they have."
Crouse said there was no doubt that the news would, in conservatives' eyes, be damaging to the Bush administration, which already has been chided by some leaders on the right for what they felt was halfhearted commitment to anti-abortion and anti-gay-rights causes in this year's general election.
Carrie Gordon Earll, a policy analyst for the conservative Christian ministry Focus on the Family, expressed empathy for the Cheney family but depicted the newly announced pregnancy as unwise.
"Just because you can conceive a child outside a one-woman, one-man marriage doesn't mean it's a good idea," said. "Love can't replace a mother and a father."
The vice president's office declined to elaborate on the circumstances of Mary Cheney's pregnancy.
The news was welcomed by the president of the largest national gay-rights group, Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign.
"Mary and Heather's decision to have a child is an example that families in America come in all different shapes and sizes," he said. "The bottom line is that a family is made up of love and commitment."[/q]
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
eep.
sorry.
sorry.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
37 and 45 and having a baby!?
No thank you.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
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.
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.
Shaliz
War Child
Re: Concerned Women for America
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.
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.
sue4u2
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I'm concerned about a group like Concerned Mothers of America being concerned about something that is none of their concern.
Irvine511 said:
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.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
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/0,,20004374_1,00.html
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/0,,20004374_1,00.html
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
good for Bush.
seriously.
one suspects he's a closet tolerant.
seriously.
one suspects he's a closet tolerant.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
What a bunch of hypocrisy.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
(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."
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
Blue Crack Addict
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
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
Blue Crack Addict
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.
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.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
MrsSpringsteen said:
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
James Dobson is just a fascist spewing pseudoscience. I don't think he really cares about families. It's all ego.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
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.”
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.”
