Friday, May 31, 2013


More 7QTs at Jen's Conversion Diary

1. My review of Jonathan Last's What to Expect When No One is Expecting.

Today being an only child is common, it is like we have a one child policy without needing a policy at all. Children are more work/investment then ever, time and monetarily. Jonathan Last compares 'time spent' with children is actually considerably more, then decades ago, never mind their costs (Crap they want for their birthdays parties/Christmas, activities, and college). Growing up children will rarely see children who have a few siblings.

2. "Who your parents are" over at Felice me fa

I don’t really blame my parents for anything, I just sometimes marvel at the road not taken. When I look at the road that was taken, it’s a road through libraries and museums and sports and travel. It’s a road of companionship, on which I never doubted for a second that my parents delighted in me and wanted to spend time with me.
This is so important to many parents who feel at times they can't give their child everything, if a child knows they are loved they will flourish.

3. Unfortunately I have to miss out on a workshop sponsored by the Department of Children and Families on Fatherhood Engagement. I was really looking forward to these workshops, as a matter of public policy really reach out to dads who have been for one reason or another no long in a relationship with the child's mother and with the child. Other states have programs to ensure that children are connected with their parents.

Get On The Bus was founded by Sister Suzanne Jabro 13 years ago. The program is funded by donations from churches, schools, family foundations, grants and other organizations. Staying connected to their children is just as important for incarcerated mothers and fathers as it is for the kids. Research indicates it's the greatest indicator for a successful re-entry upon release.

4. This is what is wrong with marriage. No this isn't the Greatest Wedding Photo of All time.

I'm all for having fun at a wedding, but this isn't fun. It's narcissistic. The average wedding costs over 28 thousand a year. There is no need for a wedding to cost that much, the expectation of the wedding has been very prohibitive to many couples from marrying.

Everyone, this photo doesn't represent marriage. You know what makes a good wedding photo? A photo in which the couple is still married in a healthy relationship.. That is the only criteria for the greatest wedding photo.

5. From Failblog

6. So we have to talk all around the issues of local economic development without ever saying marriage rates in relationship to children. "According to Vermont "Number of children in a community depends on characteristics of its residents" Yes, the characteristics of the residents. We just can't say the actual characteristic, because stating one of those characteristics is a heterosexual relationship open to have children would be against the law.

"A declining population of young families and young adults presents serious consequences for our economy and the health of our communities. While housing development can not guarantee more young people will choose to stay in Vermont, community leaders who want to retain younger Vermonters need to plan housing development that is most desirable for families starting out on their own."

The good news, for those still serious about marriage as a matter of public policy, there are many areas in which our voices are still needed. Again, as long as we don't say the word marriage, we're fine. Demography is a balance, there is room for everyone. But we need to address these needs according to the different characteristics, at times this is important and not unjust.

7. Recently I've been more engaged in civic life here in Lowell, I was recently appointed to the Animal Advisory Board for the city and I will be attending an alumni event at UMass Lowell for graduates who are now attorneys. I'm inactive, so I can not and do not represent myself to the public as a lawyer, but yes I did graduate from law school and passed the Bar.

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

"What to Expect, When No One is Expecting"

Jonathan Last gets it. The government can't make people have babies (bribes) and children (strictly as a want) don't make you happier. Paradoxical thoughts. Societies are not stable without children, less violent, but not stable. Children will only be less stressful, if you are in a stable/healthy relationship with the other parent.

This doesn't mean I don't love my children, rather they are not responsible for making me happy. Children are to be loved, they are not to be burdened with pleasing their parents desires. What does that mean? I want my children to want to do things on their own, and not to make me happy (shut up their mother). The Fourth Commandment to obey you parent is only up to adulthood,

"As they grow up, children should continue to respect their parents. They should anticipate their wishes, willingly seek their advice, and accept their just admonitions. Obedience toward parents ceases with the emancipation of the children; not so respect, which is always owed to them. This respect has its roots in the fear of God, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit." (2217)
This doesn't happen at a flip of a switch at 18, I don't make my kids do anything 'because I say so'. I make my children pick up the toy room, because they are responsible for their own belongings and in case the cat pukes it isn't hidden for a week until I find it. It's never 'I say so' or 'Just do it to make me happy', yes I can explain why I need to make my child do something (like flush the toilet).

Yes, many times I give in for the sake of public health and pick up the toy room or flush the toilet on their behalf. I correct them always though, one day I won't be there and I shouldn't when they are adults. Eventually after numerous modeling of love and care, they will get it.

Jonathan Last's book can be considered very depressing, as he looks at the total fertility rates around the world, with the lack of valuing marriage and children overall. It wasn't one factor that changed everything, but many. Back in the 80s, there were still some families with older kids (graduating from high school) who were one of five or six. At the time I was in elementary school, and I knew very few only one child families. Most by the time had two children in Chelmsford, and a third that was a surprise. Today being an only child is common, it is like we have a one child policy without needing a policy at all. Children are more work/investment then ever, time and monetarily. Jonathan Last compares 'time spent' with children is actually considerably more, then decades ago, never mind their costs (Crap they want for their birthdays parties/Christmas, activities, and college). Growing up children will rarely see children who have a few siblings. They may be half/step siblings, and will not grow up together.

It seems like my children are the only children without an iPod or iPad. We don't even have a our own tablets, and I'm writing this on a computer that is sever years old. Well, it isn't broken. Why replace it. We have one TV and it's in a shape of cube. It's eight years old, still not broken. Oh, we don't have cable. But next year, my oldest will get that cell phone. And, I've never been to Disney. I must be the crappiest modern day parent in the world! But with siblings they are never bored, and their imagination is like crazy.

I'm one of two, but my older brother passed, when I was 13. Now I'm an 'only', and it's lonely. On Facebook, I see my older cousins (one of seven or one of six), talk endlessly of their bond and their memories they share. I'm just a younger cousin, a generation younger viewing it all. While clearly it was tough being with 'less' materially, it seems they got the better end of the deal later in life.

WCVB has some nerve on its UnWed Motherhood/Marriage sideshow.

For several years, I've posted on the connection between marriage and motherhood, in which the term matrimony, literally means in Latin the act of being a mother'. So as I begin to read the local news, I find this slide show, "Massachusetts towns with most unmarried mothers". WCVB is the ABC affiliate here in Boston, it has always back the redefining of marriage to be just about two people, and nothing about the the natural logical outcome from heterosexual relationships, which was children and the public policy goals to achieve a stability between both maternal and paternal parent. Meanwhile Governor Deval Patrick is shaming anyone who understands that marriage really was about the needs of children, to have their mother and father as merely private thoughts that should not be shared as public opinion.

According to the slide show, well to-do suburbs like Andover had 31% of mothers not married. Lowell was at 46%. This isn't about shaming women, rather this is asking a legitimate question about the father and his role in the child's life. Where is he in relationship with the mother of his child? Will he be apart of the whole family or will her fade away? If not married, what is the health of the relationship? Is it abusive/toxic/immature? Or is the relationship otherwise healthy and loving prior to pregnancy, in which the couple could stabilize with marriage?

"Jesuits Banned from the Massachusetts Bay Colony ~ May 26, 1647"

Marie over at highlights a Massachusetts Moment when the Jesuits were banned from the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

"To Puritans, Catholicism was nothing less than idolatrous blasphemy, and Catholics were destined for eternal damnation. Second, because the Jesuits were French, and France and England were engaged in a bitter struggle for control of North America. Finally, Jesuit missionaries had converted large numbers of Indians in Canada to Catholicism. Indian converts were potential allies of France and enemies of the English. Although no Jesuit was executed for defying the ban, the legacy of anti-Catholicism in Massachusetts survived for generations."

Two weeks ago in a 7QT, I mentioned my ancestor, Guilliame Couture. He was a Jesuit Missionary.

While doing missionary work, he was captured by the Iroquois and tortured, his fellow missionaries were killed and later became Saints within the Church. Guilliame lost his middle finger, when they tore it off. After his work as a 'donne', he was allowed to marry and had several children. This, a decade before Saint Kateri was born.

Friday, May 24, 2013


7QTs over at Conversion Diary

1.The New Birds and the Bees by Mark Regnerus

Meanwhile, the most organic citizens in our midst are portrayed as the most restrictive, misogynist, and backwards. Among all the ironies that greet us in the domain of human sexuality, this is one of the most profound. Our language about sexuality is dominated by public health, with its talk of risk, “protection,” health, choice, and rights. It’s not natural and productive. It’s mechanical and consumptive.

This explains so much why I rejected contraception, it makes sex mechanical and consumptive. Sex is unitive and procreative.

2. From the Marriage Foundation (United Kingdom)

Almost all intact couples with young teens are married, new research finds. 45 per cent of young teenagers (aged 13-15 years old) are not living with both parents. Half of all family breakdown takes place during the first two years. Amongst parents who remain intact, 93 per cent are married.
3. From Science Daily Marriage Patterns Drive Fertility Decline (2010)
In today´s society however, women do not start childbearing until an older age as marriage is often delayed, and casual or short-term relationships and divorce are more common. As a result, the natural selection maintaining young-age fertility might weaken and the relative strength of natural selection on old-age fertility could increase, something that could potentially lead to improvements in old-age fertility over many generations.
But older women are just using surrogates and younger women's eggs.

4. From Science Daily Good Marriage Can Buffer Effects of Dad's Depression On Young Children (May 2013)

5. From Science Daily Children of Married Parents Less Likely to Be Obese (May 2013)

6. Long Lost Sisters Reunite at Track Meet (ABC News May 14)

"After finding out she had a sister, Jordan said she has "a different outlook on life." "It's just one more person that I'm so close to, that I can tell everything to," she said. "She'll always be my friend, she'll always be there." While the two girls have only known each other for five months, Patrice Dickerson said the sisters have been in "the honeymoon stage." She said she anticipates the two transitioning to a "normal sister relationship." "They'll get into real sister issues, like borrowing clothes, and 'She can do it, why can't I?'" Dickerson's mother said. "I'm looking forward to that.""


I will remember this one the next time my sons get to use the BB guns at Scout Camp.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

No, That is not what they say...

Umm... it was Passover.

So much for cultural sensitivity or understanding. Many corrected it over at Failblog. Lately, I've been having a problem with humor. Humor isn't funny, just cruel. This isn't just a dig on Christianity, but also on homosexuals. People, who are gay, can be around other people of the same sex without someone questioning if the whole group is gay. Those are the bigots. It's rude and wrong to speculate on others.

"Dad takes one for the team"

This is only funny, if you understand men do not birth babies and women do.(Failblog)

Saturday, May 18, 2013

"You know, one of the biggest challenges – I grew up without a father,” - President Obama

Obama invokes his fatherless childhood at stop in Baltimore

Best comment from the article from 'Connie. b.d'

"When Obama looks back on his Presidency, he may wish that he had spent more time trying to inspire young black men to be responsible fathers. He could have been a voice calling for stronger families, with a mother and father, working together, to raise their children. His voice in the black community would have meant so much.

It's sad that so many black women have come to emulate the stars in the entertainment industry who choose single motherhood - especially sad, since so many of those stars are affluent, usually selfish & self-centered woman, who can afford to raise children with a nanny instead of a father - and its sad that there isn't more realization that an intact family is the single most important indicator of a child's success, in school, and in life. He could have made such a difference"

She mentions the entertainment industry. I don't watch a lot of TV. I have enough in Lowell. Lowell isn't Hollywood, even though The Fighter was an accurate representation of Lowell. TV influences a lot. It passively suggests through humor or drama, what is the ideal. There is nothing wrong with entertainment, it's the idea that we should accept what is entertaining passively that is wrong.

Hollywood’s ‘Gay Culture’ Reshaping America: Almost 20% of Americans say TV has shifted their opinion in favor of the redefinition of marriage. -National Catholic Register
However, GLAAD has made known that not all homosexuals in Hollywood are welcome, especially when they step out of line with GLAAD’s agenda. Bret Easton Ellis, screenwriter and author of the book American Psycho, took to Twitter to claim that GLAAD had banned him from the awards ceremony over controversial tweets criticizing what he called the “politically correct gay agenda.”

Bret Easton Ellis speaks up over at OUT, "In the Reign of the Gay Magical Elves"

For all the good it has done, many gays have seen it as a group that could be almost fascistically politically correct and in confused ways: an organization that preached tolerance but would also bitch-slap anyone who didn’t necessarily agree with their agenda. GLAAD was at the red-hot center of creating The Gay Man as Magical Elf in the culture and often awarded the stereotypes parading around in embarrassing queer movies and degrading retro sitcoms as simply “gay positive” because they were, um, gay, and conveniently disregarded the fact that there is a silent majority of gay men who actively loathe and resist the caricatures on display. And, no, GLAAD, these men don’t hate themselves.
The fact that PC gays often demand a candied fantasy that doesn’t really exist but, hey, represents our cause, rather than a sensitive and emotionally complicated movie written and directed by a gay man who is an artist, is a huge part of the disconnect within certain factions of the gay community. Even though Weekend was tossed a GLAAD award, that early criticism of my initial endorsement was indicative of this weird new bullshit: the Gay Suits demanding “gay positive” in the media versus the Gay Dudes who just want “gay reality” in the media no matter how painful and flawed that reality is.

OK, considering one of the characters grew up in foster care without either his mother or father, I really should watch Weekend. This is what real people want, they want characters to be representative of reality.

Wait, this was to about Obama talking about the issue of fatherless in his life. I mention Deval Patrick spoke with so much emotion about the problems of his mother and father not being together, as well a day or two ago. Yet, Deval Patrick characterizes redefining marriage as in the 'Magical Elf' ideal that Ellis rightfully is concern about, that marriage is that "adopting an Asian baby, planned their wedding over Mojitos at The Abbey, registered at Neiman-Marcus, and booked The Parker in Palm Springs for the nuptials". Life isn't like that, no matter who you are. We're all flawed as human beings, and this is how we are all ordinary.

Friday, May 17, 2013

7QT Punched in the Gut

More 7QTs over at Jen's Conversion Diary

1. Warning to Catholics this photo/Internet Meme is painful. The trap to respond emotionally is a common occurrence on our Facebook Feeds.

2. Yeah, a good punch in the gut. Wasn't it? (I didn't respond back) But when you make such remarks in regards to the horrible child abuse that occurred within the Catholic Church, you are not giving an arguments in favor of gay adoption. You are utilizing the child abuse scandal for your own personal means of attack, you're not making an argument. Just make the argument.

3.Tragedy can happen anywhere, in a Catholic Church or with a gay couple. I can find numerous variations of different people (even local), who abuse children and organizations/relatives that cover it up. Photos above do not help in discussing our differences and weighing the facts on the issue.

4. The Internet Meme I saw was on Facebook, it was 'liked' by someone. So it was fed into my news feed. I don't expect everyone to agree with my public policy views or my faith, but if you disagree with me then do it positively, without having to put anyone else down.

I didn't feel it was proper to personally respond to this, it was just something 'liked' in passing. I doubt the person meant any harm, probably just saw the immediate irony of the message. In fact the person and I agree how the breakdown of a relationship, breaks down the ability for a child to see his/her father.

5. And that's my struggle with discussing marriage, no matter how positive I make it. It gets back that somehow I'm creating a negative. I'm not. It is not a negative to say a child has a mother and father. Also I've made it very clear how 'non-adoption' I am, searching out for related kin as a proper home is a priority before seeking non-biological relatives. Biology matters in living creatures.

6. Mum and Dad Dinosaurs Shared the Work

A study into the brooding behaviour of birds has revealed their dinosaur ancestors shared the load when it came to incubation of eggs. Research into the incubation behaviour of birds suggests the type of parental care carried out by their long extinct ancestors.
We can research dinosaurs needing their mom and their dad, but I can't say human beings need their mom and dad. I can't say we should create public policy that specifically promotes a responsibility between a man and a woman for the needs of human beings to have both biological parents there to raise them.

7. OK, something that's funny. A Father's Journal / The real reasons why most men don't cheat on their wives Here are two... read the whole thing.

5. When he sees a bountiful woman, he imagines only seeing his kids every other weekend. 7. He has seen his friends go down the path. Not one of them met with success.

Thursday, May 16, 2013

My Response to Deval Patrick

Governor Deval Patrick has an op-ed in the Washington Post, 'Gay marriage and the right to be ordinary'. I wrote a blog post six years ago addressing my concerns. No where in his op-ed does he address any public policy concerns regarding a relationship between both parents and children.

Massachusetts’ Governor on his parent’s broken marriage

Patrick shaped by father's absence By Sally Jacobs, Globe Staff | March 25, 2007 It was supposed to be Deval Patrick's day of triumph.

He was 18 years old and his family was gathered in the crowded Milton Academy gymnasium on a rainy summer morning in 1974 to watch him graduate. Suddenly, his father, who had largely abandoned the family 15 years earlier and had seen his son rarely, showed up unexpectedly. Deval was not happy to see him.

Patrick's family -- his mother, grandparents, and sister -- sat though the ceremony rigid with tension, angrily eyeing Pat Patrick at the end of the row. And then as they all drove in his grandfather's Buick toward a restaurant to celebrate, his parents began to fight. They screamed at each other, and curses flew. Patrick senior, an emotional man who had opposed his son's attending the elite private school, broke into tears.

Through it all, Deval sat quietly in the front seat. When the car stopped at a light he got out, slammed the door, and stamped back to his dorm.

"It was a disaster," the governor recalled in an interview in his State House office. "I am thinking, this is supposed to be my day. . . . I just bailed."

Patrick was funded heavily by the neutered marriage lobby in his early candidacy in the Democratic primary. I questioned back on my blog last year, when I was making a decision on who to vote for in that primary. Before he was even sworn in a few months ago, he attempted to lobby the legislature to close the session before having a vote on the marriage amendment. One of the arguments for neutered marriage is that mom and dads don't matter at all, clearly it does even for Deval.

I wrote this on my (old) blog back in August 2006 during the democratic primary about Deval Patrick.

"He should be proud that he is a husband and father. His family made sacrifices for his career, so we could enjoy the fruit of his legal and corporate accomplishments. His wife, who I believe is also a lawyer, indeed probably has her own career but I'm sure her career took a back seat so he could work with President Clinton or on the multiple seats as Board of Director on major corporations.

I shouldn't have to down play the fact I'm wife or mother, to be anything I want outside of home. Of course with young children, I can't be at two places at once and such endeavors will have to wait until I'm middle aged and the kids older. But here is Deval's greatest accomplishment, his marriage with his wife and daughters, when his mother had no husband and he had no father. Instead of embracing this, he denies them for political correctness.

Massachusetts is a sad state, where politicians have to deny being a very decent man to his family, because it might offend those who want to redefine marriage into a mere legal status of rights and not a institution of society for a man and woman in which the needs protection and acknowledgement within our civil laws. "

Monday, May 13, 2013

"What do the children say?"

"What do the children say?" - Robert Oscar Lopez via Mercatornet

I support same-sex civil unions and foster care, but I have always resisted the idea that government should encourage same-sex couples to imagine that their partnerships are indistinguishable from actual marriages. Such a self-definition for gays would be based on a lie, and anything based on a lie will backfire.

The richest and most successful same-sex couple still cannot provide a child something that the poorest and most struggling spouses can provide: a mom and a dad. Having spent forty years immersed in the gay community, I have seen how that reality triggers anger and vicious recrimination from same-sex couples, who are often tempted to bad-mouth so-called “dysfunctional” or “trashy” straight couples in order to say, “We deserve to have kids more than they do!”

But I am here to say no, having a mom and a dad is a precious value in its own right and not something that can be overridden, even if a gay couple has lots of money, can send a kid to the best schools, and raises the kid to be an Eagle Scout.

It’s disturbingly classist and elitist for gay men to think they can love their children unreservedly after treating their surrogate mother like an incubator, or for lesbians to think they can love their children unconditionally after treating their sperm-donor father like a tube of toothpaste.

This is where the degree of law and reasoning could come to an agreement. In Lowell, there are no rich benefactors for children. Well, there is. It is call the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Money can only go so far for these children. At Department of Children & Families, we have 'million dollar babies', in which the tax payer pays out for the needs of children without families. They need these services, but they wouldn't need these services if their parents had the ability to parent.

I also would like to point out Lopez's different between foster care and 'third party procreation', which commercializes the child for family creation, rather then helping a child who loss his/her family. In foster care, the focus is on the child's needs and not on the adult's rights. Biological parents and their rights are protected. If terminated, it is done through a legal process and with notice.Services, when appropriate, are always offered before the termination process.

In Massachusetts same-sex couples/single people can foster, the Department places what will be the best fit for child and family. Foster parents, unlike couples who are trying to prove their parenting abilities, will admit when they need help. In fact, as a biological mother married to the biological father of my children, I even need to ask for help! So when a female same-sex couple raises a male young teenager in foster care, states the child needs a male role model. Guess what? No one is offended. The foster parents are not admitting defeat in their same-sex parenting, they are acknowledging the child's needs over their pride and that is what parenting is all about.


via Facebook
couldn't help notice the irony of all the pro-redefining-marriage friends of mine who posted movingly about their mothers today. Mother's Day and its male counterpart next month are abundant evidence that we relate to our same-sex parent differently than to our opposite-sex parent, and that we need both. Of course, the rush for gay equality is so headlong that when faced with this contradiction, the marriage-redefiners will deny anything unique or necessary about motherhood and call for "Parent One Day" and "Parent Two Day." It makes me sad. -David Benkof
Some days I feel like I'm in a zombie movie.

Friday, May 10, 2013

7QT I'm related to this guy.

Seven Quick Takes sponsored by Jen at Conversion Diary

1. I'm related to this guy.

His name is Guillaume Couture.(My maiden name is Couture, as a direct decendent on my father's side.) He came to the New World as a lay Jesuit. While doing missionary work, he was captured by the Iroquois and tortured, his fellow missionaries were killed and later became Saints within the Church. Guilliame lost his middle finger, when they tore it off. After his work as a 'donne', he was allowed to marry and had several children. This, a decade before Saint Kateri was born.

2. The world has lost it's Yin-Yang.

In Chinese philosophy, the concept of yin-yang (simplified Chinese: 阴阳; traditional Chinese: 陰陽; pinyin: yīnyáng), which is often called "yin and yang", is used to describe how seemingly opposite or contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world; and, how they give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another. Many natural dualities (such as male and female, light and dark, high and low, hot and cold, water and fire, life and death, and so on) are thought of as physical manifestations of the yin-yang concept.
Secular culture pushes away from the the understanding we're men and women. In a spiritual and biological sense uniquely different and both as gifts. Today when we speak of gender equality, it usually means making sex androgynous and making gender void. The most offensive thing I can say about sexuality, is that men and women are different.The roles of masculinity and femininity, are very spiritual. It is why God Parents are one of each gender as well. God Parents do not have to be a married couple. I have single people and even siblings as God Parents to my children. They each represent the spiritual aspect of gender, as role models.

3.The More Feathers a Male Sparrow Carries to the Nest, the More Eggs the Female Will Lay

According to their results, carrying feathers could be a result of sexual selection by the females as they put more energy into reproduction if they have more feathers in the nest. "They provide excellent insulation and the females know that less chicks will die if the male brings more feathers," the expert stated.
Nature, is at times, shows what we fail to see in ourselves.

4.Our Yin Yang is off. Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters

"American society has become anti-male. Men are sensing the backlash and are consciously and unconsciously going “on strike.” They are dropping out of college, leaving the workforce and avoiding marriage and fatherhood at alarming rates. The trend is so pronounced that a number of books have been written about this “man-child” phenomenon, concluding that men have taken a vacation from responsibility simply because they can. But why should men participate in a system that seems to be increasingly stacked against them? "
If our laws demands that birth certificates must state 'two moms' and no father in the name of equality. If you know how screwed over you become through divorced? What is our culture really saying? Men aren't needed fully, they're disposable. Good only as a 'sperm donor', metaphorically as well. We already see how disposable women and babies are. Logical follows.

5. I had no idea who Jodi Arias. Glad to see justice served, but was her trial really newsworthy at a national scale?

6. I really think my children will not be upset, that we never had cable. I think we need to upgrade to WiFi. I'm a little nervous, because I want media to be used in public areas of the home.

7.Back to my elder, Guillaume. Many days I worry about being a Catholic in this secular world, but I'm not a missionary who moved to a 'new world' to see all my friends martyred and being maimed by captives.

Guillaume, North American Martyrs, and Saint Kateri PRAY FOR US.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Marriage Unique for a Reason

USCCB has this insert on Marriage, and while I understand it seems difficult to state what is the unpopular, undervalued, and falsely labeled as hatred by strong financial interests. The truth matters to be stated clearly with charity. Here is more info.

Everyone has inviolable dignity and deserves love and respect. There are many ways to protect the basic human rights of all, but redefining marriage serves no one’s rights, least of all those of children.

What is marriage? Marriage is the permanent and exclusive union of one man and one woman, for the good of the spouses and for the procreation and education of children. One man, one woman—for life. (See Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes, no. 48).

The difference is the difference. Men and women matter. They are equal but different. Sexual difference is essential to marriage.

Mothers and fathers matter. They aren’t interchangeable. Every child has a basic, natural right to come from and be raised in the loving marital union of his or her own father and mother.

Protecting marriage matters to everyone. It’s Catholic social teaching 101: pro-woman, pro-man, pro-child. Redefining marriage in the law says many false things: women – mothers – are dispensable; men – fathers – are dispensable; what adults want trumps what a child deserves and has a basic right to.

I made a few comments this week over at Professor Althouse.

"How can someone protest something, that logically seems pretty reasonable. Heterosexual behavior creates life, we want a man and a woman to be responsible to raising their children as husband and wife.

Why is secular culture fighting, not just against the Church, but this concept as whole? The majority of Americans at this point I assume think marriage is obsolete, in terms of culture and public policy.

"It doesn't mean I would disrespect a relationship between two people of the same sex, but at most their relationship is on based love of companionship. There is no sexual unity. Anal and oral sex do not represent sexual unity, in heterosexual couples as well. The Sacrament of Marriage is not a 'Best Friends Forever' ceremony.

Secular culture pushes away from the the understanding we're men and women. In a spiritual and biological sense uniquely different and both as gifts. Today when we speak of gender equality, it usually means making sexuality androgynous and making gender void. As many acknowledge, gay marriage is a result, not the cause of this thinking."

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

The problem doesn't go away....

Yesterday Rhode Island, today Delaware, next month another state. The research has been there, and swept aside on the real need for a child to be raised by both biological parents under one roof. I don't have the lobbying power of Dupont, or other corporate sponsors of legislation that redefine marriage and thwart its original public policy goals. From Town Hall Kellie Fiedorek | May 06, 2013

And most tragic is the result a “yes” vote will have on the children of Delaware. Redefining marriage places the state’s endorsement on fatherless and motherless homes, as could be exemplified in new, sterile government forms that read “Parent A” and “Parent B.” It’s one thing for children to grow up without a father or a mother through the various consequences of life. It’s entirely something else to intentionally create that reality....

Throughout civilization, marriage has been recognized by diverse cultures for the good of children, the family, and society at large. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the importance of marriage multiple times, stating that marriage between a man and a woman is “essential to our very existence and survival.” And the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that it is a child’s right to know and be cared for by her mother and father wherever possible....

As the historic vote on Tuesday approaches, let us pause to consider: Is this what we want for our children? Do we want our children and grandchildren to know that we prioritized the emotional desires of adults over their needs? How do we look a child in the eye and tell them that they didn’t get a father or a mother because we decided that they didn’t need one? That’s a simple question worth asking.

From (Part 2) Corporations Don't Love You or Care, and Progressive Liberalism is as Dead as Social Conservatism
Why is a large corporation which spends millions in lobbying, upwards of 1.2 million within a quarter, that pays no taxes to our federal government interested in Marriage? Why not talk about the issue of fatherless homes and parental engagement for the rights and needs of children in their home state of Delaware? Why is the push for redefining marriage coming from 1%? Will the left part of the 99% question their motives?

Monday, May 6, 2013

Oprah’s Lifeclass: Fatherless Sons

Iyanla Vanzant discusses the importance of fathers in new OWN special, ‘Oprah’s Lifeclass: Fatherless Sons’

Oprah says during Oprah’s Lifeclass: Fatherless Sons that the issue of fatherless sons is one that you most wanted to take on. Why?

It’s a topic I think that we all experience, but we don’t really talk about with a solution in mind. Everyone talks about single moms. Everyone talks about the difficulties we see young men going through. We’ve made a joke about it in songs. We talk about “baby mama.” We talk about “baby daddy.” We don’t talk about the baby. Fatherless sons are the babies in the midst of the drama between the mother and the father. And they’re dropping out of high school. They’re ending up in jail. They’re killing each other. All of these things are going on. We just seem to have our hands tied. We have to talk about the impact on a young man’s life when his father isn’t there. We have to talk about the humanity, the human qualities, of what happens when a child has a missing parent.

Meanwhile in Iowa ‘Mother’ and ‘father’ labels may be removed from Iowa birth certificates
“The court found that the department’s construction of the presumption of paternity law — which directs the department to name a woman’s husband as the father of her child on the birth certificate — was correct,” Carver-Kimm wrote. “But the Court went on to hold that the statute itself violates the equal protection clause of the constitution.”

The reality that every child has a mother and father is 'violation' of the equal protecting clause? What about protecting children's rights to both biological parents? Don't we want both a mother and father to both be equally responsible to their child? The disturbing twisting of rights, that the child's right to biological kin are to be transferred with no due process is beyond incomprehensible. So much for truth and justice?

First Look: Oprah's Lifeclass on Fatherless Sons

What if America's sons didn't have to grow up without their fathers? What difference could it make? It's a problem that's been going on for too long and at too great a cost. And it's time to talk about it.

Friday, May 3, 2013

7QT The Cure for Loneliness

7QT from Jen over at Conversion Diary

1. Apparently this is a big deal. My answer is make use of your time alone.I remember all those times being alone, now I'm in a situation where I'm never alone. I actually miss all of the walks being alone, being able to read a book, or listen to a CD uninterrupted. Two weeks ago I was driving home with only one of children who fell asleep, and so I took the back roads. I enjoyed it all by myself.

2. If you knew me from my childhood/teen years, you would know I was shy to the point of being rude. My apologies. I didn't know any better with my poor social skills. Eventually, I started to use this time wisely. I read more, and simply didn't wait to have a friend to come with me if I wanted to do something. I realize to go somewhere in public, all alone as a teenager was social suicide. I didn't have friends to begin with, so why should I stay home if I didn't have someone to go with me to the movies, the mall, or the beach,.

While many make the point of independent living before marriage, I didn't. I've been living 'by myself' for sometime, of course I had my parents and extended family. Learning how to cope and utilize my time all alone, was a blessing and a gift.

3. Studies have been showing that younger people are feeling more depressed about being alone, it is suggested that media and social networking as factors. I grew up when MTV showed music videos, and not 'Jersey Shore' or 'My Sweet 16'. It showcased musicians, not other people's 'real lives' (completely staged) who apparently were more interesting then the average viewer.

We also didn't have Facebook, in which your life is quantified by home many friends you had. For a high school student, this is a running tab, of who likes you and who didn't. 20 years ago, I didn't know who really liked me or hated me. But then again, I barely know anyone's name from high school. From the Gaurdian UK (August 2010) link above...

This is not just a teenage problem. In May, the Mental Health Foundation released a report called The Lonely Society? Its survey found that 53% of 18-34-year-olds had felt depressed because of loneliness, compared with just 32% of people over 55. The question of why was, in part, answered by another of the report's findings: nearly a third of young people said they spent too much time communicating online and not enough in person.

4. Is modern life making us lonely? BBC April 2013

"We have data that suggests people's social networks have got smaller and families are not providing the same level of social context they may have done 50 years ago. "It's not because they are bad or uncaring families, but it's to do with geographical distance, marriage breakdown, multiple caring responsibilities and longer working hours," he says.

From New Zealand One million Kiwis feel lonely every month (April 2013)

Strikingly, younger people were the most likely to feel lonely, the Loneliness in New Zealand report, released by Statistics New Zealand today, shows. Almost one in five people under 30 said they felt forlorn at least some of the time. Sixteen per cent of those between 30 and 64, and just over one in 10 aged 65 and over, felt the same.

5. And being lonely has become its own niche marketing group for companies. Social Isolation: Are Lonely Consumers Actually Loners or Conformers? Science Daily (October 2010)

But, according to the authors, the lonely people don't want to advertise their minority status. "Lonely people's preference for the minority-endorsed products was only found when their preferences were kept private," the authors write. "They switched to majority-endorsed products once their preferences became public." The authors suggest that marketers keep in mind the lonely factor when targeting consumers, like seniors, who might be less likely to respond positively to rave reviews from a majority of customers, for example.
A company can't sell a product on its merits, but how popular and 'in the majority' one will feel when they purchase the product. I thought this marketing manipulation only worked with children? Remember we begged our parents for that 'it' item, that everyone else had?

6.I like everyone else, use social media. Despite being online a lot, I use the Internet for information and rarely watch TV. I only have 110 friends on Facebook, and it is either family, neighbors, people from church, or locals that I know from political activity. I like the 'news feed' option of informative links to websites of interest, I like seeing the updates from family and picture sharing. I like seeing the personal side of people, of individuals I have nothing in common with in terms of thought and lifestyle. I do not see it as missing out on anything. I'm getting all that I want to see.

Do You Fear You Are Missing Out? (Science Daily April 2013)
As lead researcher and psychologist Dr Andy Przybylski explained, the fear of missing out is not new, but the rise is social media offers a window into other people's lives like never before. The problem for people with a high level of FoMO is they may become so involved is seeing what their friends are doing and they are not, they often ignore what they are actually enjoying themselves.

7. Being alone doesn't mean loneliness. Being alone and what to do when you're alone is a skill, everyone should learn. Today children have suffered from being 'over scheduled', they don't know what to do when there is no one else around or something planned by someone else. Being alone teaches one to self-initiate, and not waiting around in a personal pity party staring at others from online photos. Do it anyways, by yourself, even if you don't have 5000 Facebook friends to share it with.

I'm not sure if any of this helps, I came from a pretty secure and stable home environment and I've been married for almost 13 years with four children. I would like to think if I single and without children, I would still be able entertain personal and professional interests more in depth if given the time without a sense of feeling lonely.

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Rhode Island ignored the facts on Children and Marriage

From RI Kids Count (Page 10)

Single-Parent Families

2000 RI 32%US 31%

2011 RI 38% US 35%

National Rank* 39th New England Rank** 6th *1st is best; 50th is worst **1st is best; 6th is worst The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT

Economic Well-Being and Family Structure

Economic status during early childhood can have a profound effect on children’s health and development. Stable family structure is strongly correlated with economic well-being. Married-parent families have the highest economic status, followed by cohabiting-parent families, and then by single-parent families. For women, entering marriages or cohabiting relationships (especially with the child’s biological father) is associated with increased economic status. Divorces and exits from cohabiting relationships are associated with declines in economic well-being.12

Massachusetts did radically change marriage.

I miss being a lawyer. I honestly believe one shouldn't take on the representation of clients, unless they can be full dedicated to the practice. Being a lawyer isn't a part-time job. So I've been in-active for a very long time.

It is amazing how application of the rule of law plays out in court.

CHARRON vs. AMARAL, 451 Mass. 767

This court concluded that a same-sex spouse could not pursue an action for loss of consortium of her injured spouse, where the couple were not married when the personal injury cause of action accrued, and where the change to the common-law meaning of civil marriage effected by Goodridge v. Department of Pub. Health, 440 Mass. 309 (2003), applied prospectively. [772-773] MARSHALL, C.J., concurring, with whom COWIN and BOTSFORD, JJ., joined
And while when courts usually 'strike down' a law when it is unconstitutional, the Supreme Judicial Court didn't do that in Goodridge.
The court did not strike down the marriage statute; instead, it "refined the common-law meaning of [civil] marriage . . . to mean the voluntary union of two persons as spouses, to the exclusion of all others." Id. at 343. "[M]indful that [its] decision mark[ed] a change in the history of [the Commonwealth's] marriage law," the court stayed the entry of judgment of its decision "for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate." Id. at 312, 344. "The purpose of the stay was to afford the Legislature an opportunity to conform the existing statutes to the provisions of the Goodridge decision." Opinions of the Justices, 440 Mass. 1201 , 1204 (2004).

As a student of law and an inactive member of the Massachusetts Bar, why didn't the Court just strike out all marriage laws? The Court really can't force the legislature make laws in accordance to their legal opinion. It isn't in the power of the Court, 'to order' the legislative branch to "conform" law to their opinion. It really can only say, yes or no to a law.

But then again, imagine if they stuck down all marriage laws. No one would married in the state of Massachusetts, no one could pull a marriage license, also no could get divorced All children would technically be born out of wedlock. Nothing could of happened without the state legislature rewriting the to laws that would conform to the Court's opinion. Yes, That would be radical.

As Goodridge recognized, where a change in law is so radical that the consequences of that change realistically require time for the Legislature to act, a court may make the remedy for unconstitutional laws prospective only. Id. at 312, 344, citing Michaud v. Sheriff of Essex County, 390 Mass. 523 , 535-536 (1983) (court mindful that it changed history of marriage law). It is obvious that Goodridge was intended to apply prospectively; thus, it is not necessary for us to address Kalish's contention that we should apply Goodridge retroactively.
While Chief Justice Marshall agrees with the Summary Judgement as properly ordered, she goes out of her way to state
The Goodridge decision did not change the nature of civil marriage in the Commonwealth; it made the laws of civil marriage accessible to a class of individuals who had been unconstitutionally barred from such access. The Legislature, we emphasized, retained its "broad discretion" to define and regulate the "protections, benefits, and obligations" of civil marriage. Goodridge, supra at 343-344. And our decision did not disturb the Commonwealth's strong public policy favoring a clearly defined, unambiguous legal status.
Pardon me, Chief Justice..... OK, how would I say this to the (Retired) Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. Your Honor, You're are denial.

Civil laws regarding marriage today, ten years later after Goodridge, very much changed the nature and attitudes towards civil marriage. Today marriage's policy is viewed to have nothing to do with the community's public interest that a child is to be being raised by his or her own mother and father. Wasn't that an very important obligation of civil marriage?

The numbers of children not being raised by both their mother and father in an intact home are dramatically decreasing, as our value for the 'refined' version of civil marriage increases. Was this really a good thing for any society, even a progressively minded one in Massachusetts?