FATHERHOOD BY A NEW FORMULA: Mark Miller replies to Justin Katz

I do not understand what this has to do with SSM. It is true that parenthood has become more 'parent-centered' than 'child-centered'. But I don't see how that connects to legitimizing gay relationships or acknowledging that gays--both single and partnered--raise children. Unless his point is that gays wanting to become parents is inherently selfish while heterosexuals wishing to become parents is not.

If Justin's point is that allowing this specific instance is more about meeting his needs than the child's needs, then I would agree. But couldn't the same thing be said about any couple choosing to have biological children rather than adopt? Isn't that 'selfish'?

There are many scenarios in which it is selfish to want and have a child. I suspect Justin's point is that any scenario where a child is brought into a home where there is not a married man and women is 'selfish' since it is clearly in the best interest of the child to be raised in that environment.

But if he is to take that stand, then he must also apply that to other scenarios not involving homosexuals. Would he write the same if the man in question were heterosexual? If it were a single woman? Is it selfish for someone who has lost their spouse to want to keep custody of their children when those children could be put in a home with two parents?

While it is true that more people want to have children for what would be considered selfish reasons to many, the pursuit of a legal solution to that is akin to putting a cap on income and savings because 'greed' is a bad thing.

"But what about the child?" is a legitimate question to ask. But that question needs to be evenly applied to both gay and straight persons.
posted by Eve at 7:48 PM | Link |

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home