California Narcissists use children as human shields

Gotta love his headline:

California bill would allow a child to have more than two parents

The really oily and vile word in this is “allow”. Because, you know, The Children are just clamoring to be “allowed” to have more than two parents. This isn’t a bunch of selfish narcissists clamoring for the force of law to legitimate whatever selfish combinations of multiple coupling and sexual adventurism excites them this week. No. It’s “allowing” The Children to have that big screwed-up polygamous cult of polymorphous perversity they’ve always dreamed would raise them.

Good thing approval of gay “marriage” hasn’t led to further debasements of the family as ignorant panicky Christians warned it would.

"What we need is a revolution of tenderness. No more slogans, no more banners, no ..."

Bravo, Mr. Rowen!
"They were good, for what they were. LOTR didn't have to be three three-hour movies, ..."

The Hobbit: A Long-Expected Autopsy
"That was really fascinating, Linda. Thank you."

Gun Cult Renews Commitment to Lies ..."
"The pro-life movement has always been a fraud. It's only aim is to screw workers.I ..."

Bravo, Mr. Rowen!

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Qualis Rex

    Very sad. Yet another generation being sacrificed at the altar of Moloch.

  • Nate

    Gay marriage leads to polyamory. Get ready.

    “Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationship, and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others. A majority of people – whatever their sexual and gender identities…stand to gain from alternative forms of household recognition beyond one-size-fits-all marriage. For example: …Households in which there is more than one conjugal partner”

    This is a few years old now, but if you look at the signatories, you see that those endorsing the idea aren’t lightweights and no-names.

  • A Philosopher

    Either step-parents are not parents, or children do regularly have more than two parents. Which disjunct do you prefer?

    • Nate

      Hi Philosopher,
      I’m amazed how readily you miss the point here.
      Also, you’ll make a lot more friends on this blog if you quit with the philosophy jargon. There are lots of philosophers on this blog, but you’re the only one who feels the need to sound like you’re writing for Analysis.

      • Nate

        Sorry Philosopher,
        That was snarky. I take it back. Your comment is perfectly fine.

        • A Philosopher

          Fair enough. I retract my even snarkier snark.

      • A Philosopher


        I did see that the point was to take a jab at same-sex marriage, so: not missed. And: “disjunct” is jargon? I guess I’ve been living the life too long.

    • ivan_the_mad

      You need to define your terms before we can decide on your exclusive disjunction. By step-parent, do you mean somebody who has legal custody? By parent, do you mean simply “an adult involved in their life” or somebody who legally has custody? As the article notes, current CA law is that only two persons may legally be the child’s parents.

  • ds

    I must agree this is a bad idea, if for no other reason than legal rights of parents is complicated enough as it is. My sister is going through a divorce and hammering out a custody agreement. This is already a nightmare without bringing a third person into it.

    It’s like the case for grandparents rights. It’s well intended, but it’s obvious from the potential pitfalls that it’s a real bad idea.

  • Chris

    Well now that “marriage” is a meaningless word, let’s do the same thing to “parenthood”.

  • bob

    Oh, to be a lawyer now. The cans of worms just keep on opening up. Does a child get to do this on his own or does the “parent” have a say as well? Does this “relationship” have an exit strategy, or is the unwitting (there are none with wits) 3rd, 4th, whatever on the hook for medical insurance, tuition bills, car repairs, other liabilities? The two parent neanderthals will prove to be the best off. Remember, alternative “marriages” have NO EFFECT on your marriage, you’re just a hate monger to oppose them.

  • Margaret

    Good grief. Medical consent? FAFSA? This seems designed to keep lawyers employee.g…

  • Martin T

    If a group of people can be the parents, why not the State? . . . and, after all, who knows what’s better for the child, the mere biological progenitors or professionals? . . . and. . . with that thought, what kind of crazy idea is it that the mere begetters have rights above and beyond the State. What we really need is for the pressing needs of the State to take care of its children to take precedence over the biological units randomly producing good citizens.

    • Ted Seeber

      “Ward of the State” is the proper legal term for an orphan.

  • Ted Seeber

    I would point out that this is about divorce and remarriage and the reality many poor kids are living with. And not necessarily about gay marriage.

    I still find it sad and vile that we have to deal with such a, well, I don’t know. What do you call a culture that has lost all civilization?

    • Confederate Papist

      It’s a start. It’s a start…

    • Barbarism. You call it barbarism.