A recent comment by one of our regular posters – Marty came at the same time that a New York Times article revealed the profound selfishness some same-sex couples exhibit when conceiving children as if they were consumer goods designed to satisfy adult desire. [read on in fold...]

"Well we're going to have fatherless/motherless children anyway, whether you or anyone else likes it or not, so you ought to just go ahead make us 'married' for the sake of our kids"
Is saying.
As for me, I say "Fine. If you want to have fatherless/motherless children without giving them the benefit of an intact married family -- well, that IS your choice. But we don't owe you anything for making it -- certainly we have no responsibility to degrade the institution of marriage just because you're gonna do what you want no matter what anyone else thinks. You're a grown-up, you can make that choice if you want to -- I'll feel sorry for your kid, but I wont feel sorry for you.
Except you and I both know it won't be "marriage equality".
Separate never is. But at least you'll have a law to hide your bias behind. A state approved document that proves once and for all that "no, father figures don't matter at all.

The article refers to the case of Beth R. vs. Donna M. who both work in the media and met in 1999 and moved in together in 2002,.Donna M. became pregnant by artificial insemination in 2003, and just before the baby was due, the couple, who live in Manhattan, went to Toronto and took out a marriage license on Feb. 14, 2004,

"after the birth of the first child but before the birth of a second child, also by artificial insemination."

So here we have a woman in her 40’s who bears two children in the most self-centered way imaginable. Intentionally depriving these children of their natural Father & indeed any Father whatsoever in the home. – In contrast to both adoption & divorce, these incidents cannot be plausibly severed from “malice aforethought”
The example such “pioneers” of selfishness set is mind-boggling. If this same example were followed by the myriad of women who find themselves husbandless as their “baby hunger” & biological clocks start ticking loudly – we would find ourselves in a world were increasingly Children represent not the natural fruits of marriage but rather accessories born to fulfill adult’s felt needs.
What example this sets for an underclass riveted by the effects of illegitimacy, & father abandonment never even dawns on these women. As the article goes on to quote:

Her lawyer, Bettina D. Hindin, said in an interview last week that “her client, who is nearly 40, had had children because her biological clock was ticking and that she had been pressured into a marriage ceremony” — a “shotgun type of situation” — which she thought of as just a symbolic commitment. “You can stand in front of a rabbi or a priest, and it’s not a marriage,” Ms. Hindin said. “It’s like staging a murder. You can make it look like a murder, but it’s not necessarily a murder.”

So here are the real fruits of the same-sex “marriage” movement. The treating of children as consumer goods, Fathers as expendable “donors” – with children’s needs & societies interests in promoting responsible procreation all sacrificed on the alter of the ultimate narcissistic tendencies of a radicalized, selfish, and morally reprehensible few.


(Source Link)