In the News: The Sorry State of Families UPDATE - Lesbian Couple Fight for Child Custody

Are families with a mother and father and children too passe to survive the politically correct version?

From the Associated Press:

The birth mother of a 7-year-old Virginia girl must transfer custody of the child to the woman's former lesbian partner, a Vermont judge ruled, adding that it seems the woman has "disappeared" with her daughter.

 This lesbian couple entered into a Vermont civil union in 2000. Lisa Miller had herself artificially inseminated and she and her partner, Janet Jenkins, planned to raise the girl. As with too many modern families, the couple broke up in 2003. Miller subsequently became Christian, renounced her lesbian past, and refused her former partner "access" to the girl.

Now a Vermont judge has applied family law to the case, treating the former partner as a legal mother and stripping the birth mother of her rights to custody and to raise her daughter as she sees fit. The Vermont law will apply to the two moms as if they were a heterosexual couple.

The judge said the only way to ensure equal access to the child was to switch custody. He also said the benefits to the child of having access to both parents would be worth the difficulties of the change.

How deeply we've descended into the abyss of broken families.

Children have the right to a loving mother and father who can raise them to become moral and socially responsible adults. The seven year-old girl, Isabella, doesn't stand a chance in a world, where, the very definitions of parents, family, marriage, and sex have been neutered into meaninglessness. In the morass of modern family law and under the guise of equality for same sex couples, Isabella is the big loser.

For the sake of the next generation of children, we must ensure their right to be raised by a mother and a father. Broken families must be the exception, not the rule.

UPDATE

Michael Medved offers this analysis of the court case:

The worst part of the case is the creation of a new position of entitlement awarded to Janet Jenkins on the basis of gay sex alone. If shed been a non-romantic room-mate of the little girls mother, or even a dear old auntie who helped with the infants care, its hard to imagine the courts would have granted her custody years later. But the illogical insistence that gay partnerships must be treated as identical to procreative heterosexual unions gave Jenkins special claims to parenthood based more on the nature of her relationship to the mother than to the history of her connection to the child. In any event, the synthetic, unnatural nature of those claims based almost entirely on the securing of civil union status from the Vermont bureaucracy some nine years ago means that Jenkins parental standing rests on an artificial governmental construct, on forms and signatures, rather than any sort of organic or experiential connection.

One of the most common arguments by gay marriage advocates involves the insistence that the expansion of matrimonial rights will merely enlarge marital opportunities, with no impact at all on existing couples or the institution itself. The Miller-Jenkins case shows the absurdity of this contention and demonstrates the way that redefining marriage inevitably changes parenthood as well, turning the most fundamental, natural, elemental human relationship of mother-and-child into an officially sanctioned fiction altogether dependent on governmental fiat.