Thursday, November 4, 2010

Is Johnny Still My Child or Does He Belong to the State?

Patrick B. Crane raises an important question:

“Countries such as Britain, Spain, and Portugal are promoting abortion and contraception in the classroom without parental consent, he said, in clear opposition to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The UDHR, adopted in 1948 in the wake of the great atrocities of World War II, insisted on the primacy of parents as the educators of their children, he noted, because of the Nazi's use of the education system to indoctrinate children.”

Whose children are these? Do they belong to the parents who gave birth to them or to the State? Who possesses the over-riding claim to them? Perhaps one way of answering this question is to ask another question: “Which party loves them the most and will therefore provide best for them?”

Two prostitutes had been trying to lay claim to the same baby, both claiming that the baby was theirs? Their claims came before King Solomon:

Then the king said, "Bring me a sword." So they brought a sword for the king. He then gave an order: "Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other." The [real mother]…was filled with compassion for her son and said to the king, "Please, my lord, give her the…baby! Don't kill him!" But the other said, "Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!" Then the king gave his ruling: "Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother." (1 Kings 3:24-27)

In wisdom, Solomon gave the baby to the one who demonstrated real love – to the true mother. Instead, modern liberalism is ignoring the love of the rightful parents and is giving the child to the State educational system against the pleas of the parents.

Another way to answer the original question – “Whose child is this?” – is to ask another question: “Which party has the greatest likelihood to abuse the child?” This is not a difficult question to answer. History shows us that whenever the child becomes the ward of the State, no little comes of it. Crane mentions the Nazi debacle. The same can be said of communist indoctrination, pitting children against their parents.

Linda Waite and Maggie Gallagher report that,

“A preschooler living with one biological parent and one step-parent was forty times more likely to be sexually abused than one living with two natural parents.” (“The Case for Marriage,” 159)

We wonder what the statistics would shout when no biological parents are present and the unfortunate child finds herself in the hands of the State. In another study, it was found that:

Abuse of children is 20 times higher in cohabiting biological-parent families; and 33 times higher when the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend.”

• “Cohabitation is bad for men, worse for women, and horrible for children. It is a deadly toxin to marriage, family, and culture.”

Instead of co-opting Johnny for their own ideological purposes, the State should recognize that its long-term welfare is best served by maintaining the welfare of its most important institution – the family!

No comments:

Post a Comment