Thursday - January 29, 2009

A Post For Peiper

Peiper’s got a bad case of the sniffles. Probably brought on by the terrible cold weather over there in the UK, combined with the traditional English cost saving home construction concept of not building a house with a proper furnace. So he’s offline for a few days, but that isn’t stopping him from reading the daily newspapers. Perhaps he should get some blood pressure meds from National Health as well. So I’ll do a few UK based posts for him until he gets better.

It matters not that endless studies have shown that a “parenting unit” of one man and one woman is the superior way to raise a normal, balanced child. The law is the law, and to prove the law is in effect quotas must be kept.

Two young children are to be adopted by a gay couple, despite the protests of their grandparents. The devastated grandparents were told they would never see the youngsters again unless they dropped their opposition. The couple, who cannot be named, wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old - at 46 and 59.

For two years they fought for their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a recovering heroin addict. They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by legal bills.

The final blow came when they were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them. When the grandfather protested, he was told: ‘You can either accept it, and there’s a chance you’ll see the children twice a year, or you can take that stance and never see them again.’

The man said last night: ‘It breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to grow up in an environment without a mother figure. We are not prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their best interests.’

Social workers themselves have admitted that the little girl is ‘more wary’ of men than women.

How’s that for opening a big can of worms? No priority is given to the actual grandparents who were willing to adopt their own grandchildren. So “keeping it in the family” has no weight. No priority was given to any hetero couple willing to adopt the children, because the law says “We’re all equal”. And while we might all be equal as adults out in society, are we really all equal when it comes to raising children? Is this news article, and the major dust-up it’s causing in the UK, just aspects of latent prejudice? What about single parent households? What if the gay couple were both female?
Is this article raising the old canard that male homosexuality implies pedophilia, or is completely normal for any female of any age to be ‘more wary’ of men than women? Maybe this is just sour grapes on the grandparent’s part? On the other hand, why did they have to go to court and fight for years, at a tremendous expense, for the right to legally raise their own kin?

Go read the rest of the article, and also read Melanie Phillips’ take on things, then have your say. There are lots of aspects to this story that are debate worthy.


And another thing ... Hillary be damned, in this case it really is all about the children. And that should be the overwhelming factor. Always.

The prevailing argument that all types of family are as good as each other as far as the children are concerned simply isn’t true. While some children emerge relatively unscathed from irregular households, children need to be brought up by the two people ‘who made me’ - or, in adoptive households, in a family which closely replicates that arrangement. Where that does not happen, the child’s deepest sense of his or her identity as a human being is at some level damaged.

A child needs a mother and father because their roles in bringing that child up, and the way the child sees each of them, are not interchangeable. They are different and complementary, which is why if one of them is absent the child suffers, in many cases very badly indeed. For very young children the absence of a mother, whose nurturing role cannot be replicated even by the most loving and attentive of fathers, is particularly tragic.

Therefore to say that depriving children of a mother figure is in their best interests - as the Edinburgh social workers have said - is clearly ridiculous.

Don’t overlook the state of mind in the UK. Or lack thereof perhaps? To them, it’s a big question worthy of debate, on whether you should let your daughter have her boyfriend sleep with her in her own bed while she’s living in your house. My answer to that one was obvious: if you want the benefits, then take on the responsibilities. Go get your own apartment and a job, then you can shag your ears off whenever.

Posted by Drew458     on 01/29/2009 at 09:48 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner