"Parents don't have rights, they have responsibilities. The crucial thing in all of this is that the courts make decisions in the interest of the child."
Great, no rights, all responsibility. Who decides what the parents' responsibilities are? The Courts? The Church? (It should be noted here that Tonti-Filippini is a "catholic ethicist" whatever the fuck that is.). Don't the parent's have a right to decide what's best for a child and isn't having two parents the best thing for a child? The children are, after all, biological children of one of the men and, as such, he has a right to decide who will share his and his children's lives. This is no different to a woman who get pregnant and then brings a non-biological male figure into a child's life. Can someone please, please show me evidence of children who are harmed by having same-sex parents? Anyone? No?
Well.... here's to the Catholic Church, who are so hypocritical and so incredibly judgemental that I'm glad so few people take it seriously.
Congratulations to the new proud parents, enjoy every heart-breaking, sleep-deprived moment, every sane person in the world is wishing you all the best.
Iggy x.
Parents don't have rights? SHEESH.
ReplyDeleteI will however disagree with the whole surrogacy vs adoption thing, surrogacy is an easier option - it's cheaper, less time consuming and you don't have to prove (normally) that you're a fit parent before undertaking it. Adoption has a long long wait list and list of conditions (you have to be married, usually, no one over 40, no one with health issues of any sort etc etc).
I mean, I'd love if there were adoptive parents waiting for every single child who needed it, but the red tape between the kids vs prospective parents is overwhelming and a lot of people don't have the money.
My 2c worth anyway.
Yeah, I figured there was a lot of red tape for adoptions, unless you're Angelina or Madonna. I don't know much about the beauracracy surrounding either path.
ReplyDelete