March 5th 2011
Articles from this issue:
CANBERRA OBSERVED: Labor pounces on divisions among Liberals
HEALTH CARE: Public hopes dashed by Gillard health 'reforms'
PAID PARENTAL LEAVE: Gillard's pseudo-PPL scheme a malign charade
PUBLIC WORKS: The urgent need to build new dams
COVER STORY: Planned Parenthood's activities finally exposed
EDITORIAL: Arab political turmoil: what's cooking?
FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Obama reaps whirlwind in the Middle East
ECONOMIC AFFAIRS: Can we avoid a second global financial crisis?
NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Business leaders call for national investment fund
REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY: Children's right to know their genetic parents
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: Medical cover-up of fetal pain perception
TASMANIA: Euthanasia and assisted suicide back on the agenda
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: Bible banned at citizenship ceremonies
OPINION: The failure of multiculturalism
Brisbane dams fiasco 1 (letter)
Brisbane dams fiasco 2 (letter)
Legalising abortion (letter)
BOOK REVIEW: THE TROUBLE WITH CANADA... STILL! A Citizen Speaks Out, by William D. Gairdner
BOOK REVIEW: WHERE MEN WIN GLORY: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman, by Jon KrakauerBooks promotion page
PARENTHOOD: No man will ever replace a real mum
by Catherine Sheehan
News Weekly, March 5, 2011
We should never do anything to compromise the fact that the love of a mother can be one of the most powerful forces in nature.
A woman's body is equipped to carry a child for nine months, to give birth and also to breastfeed. The very act of breastfeeding fosters a close bond between mother and child. Clearly, therefore, nature intends a child to have a mother.
Few people would deny that mothers have a special place in our lives and that every child deserves the chance to have a mother.
I could not help feeling sad when I watched the TV scenario of the baby girl adopted by the gay couple on the TV show Modern Family.
The little girl represents many who will never know the joy of being snuggled in their mothers' arms. Sure, she will have two dads who can perform many of the functions that a mother can, but even 20 loving and caring dads could never make up for not having a mum.
There is something highly disturbing about deliberately creating a family with the intention that there will be no female parent.
This is precisely why Mother's Day is so special. Why do we shower our mums with presents and flowers? If a man can be a substitute for a mum, then Mother's Day would be meaningless.
However, Mother's Day is profoundly meaningful to many people and this is testimony to the importance of mothers and the special and unique place they have in our hearts and in our lives.
With the damage that we humans have caused to the environment, we should be more cautious about messing with nature, especially when it comes to the family unit.
The only natural way of producing a baby is through the union of a man and a woman. Therefore, nature obviously intends all children to have both a mum and a dad.
I'm sure same-sex couples who want to adopt have good intentions, but what about all the good heterosexual couples desperately waiting to adopt a child?
Why would anyone want to rob a child of the wonderful experience of having a mum? All those little, everyday things my mother did that I used to take for granted but that I now look back on with fondness: mum waiting to pick us up after school, mum cooking our favourite meals, mum listening to our problems. To all these tasks, a mother brings a uniquely feminine approach.
It is not enough to have a close female friend of the family, as a child needs a mum. I suspect many mums would be offended if told they could easily be replaced in their child's life by a man. Moreover, it is highly offensive to suggest that a woman can be substituted by any man, whether he is gay or straight.
Feminists claim we need more women in parliament, more women in big business, yet when it comes to the most important role of all, raising a future citizen, we say it's fine for there to be two dads but no mum.
It's all very well for those who have a mum to say there's nothing wrong with a child having two dads and no mum, but they're not the guinea pigs, are they?
Who are we to use the next generation of children as the subject of our social engineering experiments? The needs of children will always be more important than political correctness.
When creating laws about who can adopt children, the prime issue is the needs and rights of children, not of adults.
Whether parents are adoptive or biological, a child needs and deserves both a mum and a dad. To deny the importance of mums is to denigrate both women and motherhood.
Catherine Sheehan is a Melbourne writer. This article first appeared in the Herald Sun (Melbourne), June 16, 2010.
Join e-newsletter list
Your cart has 0 items
EDITORIAL The future of Senator Cory Bernardi
EDITORIAL Nothing new among Trump's executive orders
EUTHANASIA Quebec, Dutch, Belgian and Oregon laws a 'mess'
COVER STORY Don't grieve dumped TPP; rather, thank Trump
QUEENSLAND Pro-life Brisbane marches as abortion vote nears
ENVIRONMENT U.S. Congress to investigate shonky climate report
COVER STORY Free-trade policy sending manufacturing into free-fall
News and views from around the world
Scientists criticise "hottest year on record" hype (James Varney)
States, territories slash school funding by $100 million (Stephanie Balogh)
Confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court (Stephen Mosher)
Rescuing Governor Ahok (Bob Lowry)
Future shock: What happens when robots take our jobs? (Adam Creighton)
President Trump: Protect religious freedom (Ryan Anderson)
China to crack down further on "cult" activities (Ben Blanchard)
Polish president rules out gay marriage (Radio Poland)
U.S. state legislatures sign 334 laws in five years to restrict abortion (Micaiah Bilger)
Clinton, Trump and the politics of the English language (Ben Reinhard)