Children will be victims as parties declare war on the natural family

Children will be victims as parties declare war on the natural family
By Hermann Kelly, reporter

 

 

 


Hermann Kelly is a journalist and commentator. He writes news articles in The Sunday Times and The Daily Mail as well as regular opinion columns in The Mail on Sunday and The Irish Examiner newspapers. In early 2007 he appeared on the RTE 1 Television talk show, 'Seoige and O'Shea' as well as the RTE Radio 1 programme- 'Liveline' to talk about his newspaper articles. Kelly was a reporter for The Irish Catholic, a paper that he edited between June 2004 and January 2005.

Major articles by journalist Hermann Kelly have also been printed in The Sunday Business Post and Magill Magazine.


This article was previously published in The Irish Examiner on February 22, 2007.
It is published here with the kind consent of the author.

 

 

 

 

IF THE Government gives a damn about the welfare of children it can easily demonstrate this by supporting the natural family based on marriage and putting a complete halt to gay adoption.

 

As things stand now, the political elites in Ireland have declared war on the natural family.

 

On Tuesday, the Labour party told us it wants to bring in gay civil unions and allow homosexual partners to adopt and foster children.

 

Fine Gael, the PDs, Sinn Féin and, less stridently, Fianna Fáil have all voiced support for the legalisation of gay civil unions while Sinn Féin has also tied its colours to the mast of gay adoption.

 

While these parties all claim to support children’s welfare, they fail to recognise basic facts upon which this depends.

 

There is a raft of comprehensive studies showing the best and safest environment for the upbringing of a child is in a stable natural family based on marriage. Compared to any other form of relationship involving a child, this is the very best.

 

This stands to reason because the public commitment to marriage helps to increase its stability, and the natural sexual union of a man and woman leading to procreation provides the child with its identity, which is so essential to self-understanding.

 

In a natural family, the mother and father who raise the child born of their lovemaking have a commitment to it that is frequently stronger than their attachment to their own lives.

 

If this is the best environment for the upbringing of children, it should follow that when a vulnerable child is put up for adoption or fostering, then it is surely in the interests of that child to be placed in a loving, stable and natural family based on marriage.

 

Not so according to many of Ireland’s political parties. They all mouthed empty words in support of children’s welfare this week, but at the same time some pay homage at the shrine of gay adoption rights. They can do one of these, but they can’t do both.

 

If the natural family based on marriage is the best place for children, then to place them in the midst of a homosexual household is to put them in a place which is less good, which is deficient and lacking in the complementarity of a man and woman.

 

The parenthood of a man and a woman ensures that vulnerable children are brought up in a home where they experience the complementary psychological attributes of a man and a woman.

 

This complementarity is absent in a homosexual relationship, so this environment is inferior to that of a married couple. There are American studies which show that when compared to heterosexuals, homosexual relationships demonstrate higher rates of violence, higher incidences of mental health problems and reduced life expectancy.

 

This being the case, it would be quite irresponsible of society knowingly to place a vulnerable child in a situation which places him or her statistically at a greater risk of harm.

 

Indeed, in 2004 the American College of Paediatricians said they believed it “inappropriate, potentially hazardous to children and dangerously irresponsible to change the age-old prohibition on homosexual parenting, neither by adoption, by foster care, nor by reproductive manipulation. This position is rooted in the best available science”.

 

At a time when a growing number of married couples experience the pain of infertility, is it not sensible and right that they should be helped in every possible way to adopt or foster?

 

It is absolutely imperative that the welfare of children is paramount in all cases. It is also essential that they should not be used as guinea pigs in a sociological experiment; nor as passive instruments in an ideological campaign to further some political agenda.

 

The thing is, children are not a right, they are a gift. Two homosexuals do not have a right to someone else’s children. They have made a choice to take part in homosexual acts. These acts, by their very nature, are sterile and incapable of creating children.

 

If Adam wants to lie with Steve, or whoever, that is his choice; but the final consequence of that choice is an absence of children.

 

AS THIS country’s birth rate goes through the floor, the last thing the State should be doing is legalising and subsidising gay unions which are incapable of giving the good of children to society.

 

Homosexual activists may want the benefits of marriage, the tax breaks, the legal protections, etc, but they don’t give society the benefit of children in return.

 

Their agenda started off with wanting to share in the financial and legal benefits of marriage enjoyed by heterosexual couples, but it is now clear, highlighted by Labour’s call for adoption rights, that homosexual activists now want the children of heterosexual couples as well. And it won’t end there.

 

In the last few weeks, the Scottish national health service has published a directive insisting that nurses and other healthcare professionals should avoid using the terms ‘mother’ and ‘father’ to refer to family relationships since the terms could be offensive to homosexual couples with children. When talking to children, the directive says, consider using ‘parents’, ‘carers’ or ‘guardians’ rather than ‘mother’ or ‘father’. Along the same lines, it points out, using the terms ‘husband’‚ ‘wife’ and ‘marriage’ are not acceptable since such terms exclude lesbian, gay and bisexual people.

 

In a nutshell, stop using the terms ‘mother’ and father’ or be classed as homophobic. Scottish doctors must now speak as if a natural family based on marriage does not even exist. And all in the name of a spurious ‘equality’.

 

Perhaps you thought my earlier description of a declaration of war on the natural family was too strong.

 

Well, think again.

 

And think quickly because the rate at which the Government, the Labour party and others are suggesting measures to undermine the traditional family in the last few months is quite incredible. Actually breathtaking.

 

As the constitution currently stands, the State can already intervene in the best interests of the child when there is a demonstrable problem within a family.

 

However, the proposed wording for a new referendum, unveiled in the Dáil on Monday, goes much further that this. If passed in its present form, the constitutional amendment will allow the State much greater power to interfere and intervene in family situations.

 

You may remember the Cleveland child abuse scandal in Britain during the late 1980s when, on the word of one mistaken doctor, social workers raided many good homes to take children from parents with whom they were perfectly safe. This should give us all pause for thought.

 

If the Government’s constitutional proposals are passed, parents will have handed social workers more power to take children away from their families and into State care.

 

Under Labour’s proposed Bill on Civil Unions, children under the State’s social work care system will be handed over to homosexual couples to be adopted or fostered with greater ease.

 

Any parent with an ounce of sense, or any person who holds the welfare of children as paramount, must ensure both these crazy proposals are made absolute non-starters by using the ballot box.

 

 

 

 

The parents said ‘we want help’ the state responded ‘we want your children’

By Hermann Kelly




How to control adults by means of 'children's rights'
By Lynette Burrows



The Fight for the Family
By Lynette Burrows


Back to Articles

 

 

Realtime website traffic tracker, online visitor stats and hit counter