February 6th 2010


  Buy Issue 2820
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

FAMILY VALUES: Human rights and education

COVER STORY: Global-warming sceptic Lord Monckton visits Australia

EDITORIAL: Is Rudd Government planning a new tax grab?

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Can the Abbott-Joyce duo defeat Kevin Rudd?

ENERGY: A climate policy that is good for Australia

FAMILY LAW: Will Rudd Govt roll back shared parenting?

VICTORIA: Lesbian couple are named parents on birth certificate

NEW SOUTH WALES: NSW Govt rejects adoption by same-sex couples

UNITED STATES: Gaping holes remain in passenger airline security

NATIONAL SECURITY: Global terrorist threat escalates

CHINA: Corrupt big business and the Communist Party

POLITICAL PROFILE: Not-so-secret agenda of Obama's 'science czar'

FAMILY VALUES: Human rights and education

UNITED NATIONS: UN skirmishes over meaning of gender

Tony Abbott defended (letter)

Condoms for Haiti? (letter)

Charles and Babette Francis (letter)

News Weekly name change? (letter)

CINEMA: Cameron's latest blockbuster Avatar (rated M)

BOOK REVIEW: LOSING MY RELIGION: Unbelief in Australia, by Tom Frame

BOOK REVIEW: THE WOLF: How One German Raider Terrorised Australia and the Southern Oceans in the First World War, by Richard Guilliatt and Peter Hohnen

Books promotion page

survey link

FONT SIZE:

VICTORIA:
Lesbian couple are named parents on birth certificate


by Bill Muehlenberg

News Weekly, February 6, 2010
The quote in the last line of the newspaper article said it all: "It's on the vanguard of social change." Yep, that's for sure. This is all about social manipulation and using the political and legal process to push a radical agenda. What passes for government nowadays is simply unashamed social engineering.

I refer to a recent story in Melbourne's Herald Sun (January 12, 2010) about a new law change which has come into effect. It is about a lesbian couple who have taken advantage of a new law in Victoria allowing non-birth parents to be named on birth certificates. The story opens as follows:

"Little Drew Hardy-Hughes and her two mothers are now legally recognised as a family in Victoria. Sweeping January 1 changes to the state's reproductive laws mean that non-birth parents can now be named on birth certificates.

"Drew's parents Eilis Hughes and Kristen Hardy, of Werribee, were among the first lesbian couples to act on the landmark legislation. The birth certificate of their two-year-old daughter, conceived using a known donor, will now list Ms Hughes as the birth mother and Ms Hardy as the other 'parent'."

The quote about social change comes at the end of the story: "Victorian Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages spokeswoman, Erin Keleher, said the department was delighted it can recognise rainbow families. 'It's on the vanguard of social change,' she said."

Plenty of questions come to mind here. Just how many Victorians even knew that such a law change had taken place? Just how many Victorians were even consulted as to whether they approve of such radical social changes? Why are we allowing the democratic process to be subverted by radical minority groups? Since when do activist minorities get to railroad their agenda over the will of the majority of Victorians?

Most important of all is why have we allowed the well-being of children to be stomped under foot so that radical homosexual activists can cater to their selfish interests? Why in the world do politically correct agendas take precedence over the right of every child to be raised by his or her own biological parents?

This is nothing other than radical social engineering. A radical group of politicians and legislators have got into bed with a radical group of minority activists, and are turning society upside-down to suit their misguided agendas.

In the past, the weak and the vulnerable were the first object of government protection and concern. Now it seems that a handful of radical homosexual lobbyists are the ones getting all the attention and favour of governments - and the interests of children are trampled on.

Never mind the incontrovertible mountain of social science evidence which demonstrates how the biological two-parent family is simply the best structure in which to raise children. Never mind that virtually every society throughout human history has understood the importance of the institutions of marriage and family.

When societies allow the selfish demands of adult activist groups to trump the needs and interests of children, then we know that society has become terminal, and it is only a matter of time before its descent into barbarism is complete.

Two thousand years ago the Roman scholar Pliny the Elder said: "What we do to our children, they will do to society." Quite right. When we treat our children as mere guinea-pigs in adult social experiments, we really have forfeited the right to be called civilised.

We are now rapidly moving into the sort of brave new world scenarios that so many have warned us about. When we can treat our children as fodder to satisfy the lusts of activist minority groups, then we have well and truly lost our way.

Of course, the Labor Government in Victoria, first under Steve Bracks and now under John Brumby, has been pushing a radical social engineering agenda for years. And the homosexual activists are the biggest winners. As the birth mother said of the law change, "Symbolically it's huge. It says that we are a family unit and no one can dispute that."

She's got that right. This is about redefining the family out of existence. And, as is always the case, verbal engineering precedes social engineering. Claiming that two women in a lesbian relationship are a family is to redefine it out of existence. First change the language; then change society. That is always how the radicals have operated.

This is but another case of the activist minorities - aided and abetted by brazen and seemingly unaccountable bureaucrats and politicians - holding the rest of society to ransom. Everyone suffers as a result.

But the children are the biggest losers here. However, in a world where adult desires are the only concerns going, who cares?

Bill Muehlenberg is a commentator on contemporary issues, and lectures on ethics and philosophy. His website CultureWatch is at: www.billmuehlenberg.com




























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Cardinal rebuts commission's 'Get Pell' campaign

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

U.S. AFFAIRS First Brexit, now Trump: it's the economy, stupid!

INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENT Wikileaks reveals U.S, funding behind anti-coal campaign

COVER STORY QUT discrimination case exposes Human Rights Commission failings

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump Whitehouse



News and views from around the world

19-year-old homeschooled pro-lifer wins Ontario election by landslide (Lianne Laurence)

Trump makes right choice for education secretary (National Review)

Transgender conformity (Katherine Kersten)

Sex education programs do not reduce teen pregnancy or STI rates (Philippa Taylor)

Photographer who captured Safe Schools founder harassing bystander shuts down business (Frank Chung)

Is the global middle class here to stay? (Samuel Rines)

Donald Trump could end America's new feudalism (Joel Kotkin)

It just got easier to find the perpetrators of Stalin's purges (David Filipov)

Castro's death eradicate bacillus of old-style Marxism (Gerald Warner)

Labor MP Terri Butler in QUT race case apology (Geoff Chambers)



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm