FIC Blog

According to a proposed bill in California, Heather could have three mommies. Under the bill, SB 1476 would allow a child to have multiple parents. State Senator Mark Leno is behind the legislation, stating that “The bill brings California into the 21st Century.” Given the propensity of Connecticut’s state government to do the wrong thing for families, it is likely only a matter of time before someone proposes that we join California’s cracked-mirror version of the present. Leno’s bill passed in the California Senate and is currently in the Assembly. It would apply to gay or straight couples.

Surrogate births, same-sex relationships and assisted reproduction are altering our culture, which was once founded upon traditional Judeo-Christian principles in which the familial unit was clothed with utmost respect and dignity. Under this bill, a child of a lesbian couple who became pregnant through a surrogate mother could have three mothers, for example.

A disturbing case last year sparked the introduction of such a heinous bill, in which a woman left her lesbian partner temporarily for a man and wound up pregnant by him. The innocent party to this abysmal situation, the child, would be granted three parental figures; two mothers and one father.

Under this bill, the very fabric of the sanctity of the family is at stake. In every situation, the child becomes the true victim. Who will stand up for the rights of the innocent, the rights of those who hold the key to our future?

Supporters of the bill claim that a child’s financial situation could be enriched under a circumstance involving multiple parents. In divorces involving two unfit parents, the child could have the ability to remain with the outstanding parent(s), thus preventing the child from going into foster care.

While such instances may appear beneficial to the child in certain cases as those mentioned above, the child always remains the victim of a sad situation. Numerous unintended consequences would ensue. Tax deductions, citizenship, school notifications, and public assistance would all be greatly affected by such a law.

From a simple psychological standpoint, the child would suffer many consequences. Speaking from personal experience, divorce among two parents is difficult enough for a child. Now consider a child being juggled between three or four different households if, say, a bitter breakup were to occur. Do not tell me this will not negatively affect the child.

If the unfortunate occurrence of a divorced situation almost always inevitably affects a child in a more negative, rather than a positive light, how can a situation in which a child is tossed between more than two legal parental figures enhance a child’s life?

Before jumping the gun for gay rights and conceding to anti-family forces what the “spirit of the 21st Century” will be, let us pause for a moment and consider who the real victim of the outcome of the proposed bill is. The future of our country and the sacredness of the family unit are being brought closer and closer to the edge of the cliff. Can we halt this erosion before this country, which once stood as a light for others crossing the stormy seas, falls to its death?