Sunday, May 4, 2014

Defender of the fatherless


Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. (Psalms 82:3)


As a defender of the fatherless:

  • I cannot support any sort of law or agency that would take a child away from his or her living and capable father. A fatherless child is a fatherless child. Age and/or stage does not matter--sperm-->embryo-->baby-->child-->teenager-->etc. 
  • I cannot support the cause of any person that would take a child away from his or her living and capable father.
  • I will not support a law, agency, or cause that would define the identity of a child as disconnected from that of his or her biological mother and/or father. Every child is a child of a father and a mother--at conception, at birth and till death. I will not support anything that would attempt to destroy that identity.
  • I want for every child to know his or her father. It is not enough to know of his or her father.  
  • I believe fathers need to know and have personal responsibility for the care of the children-->in the traditional sense. As such, I cannot support the selling of offspring in whatever form, age or stage.

There are many today who, in the name of marital equality, and in the name of individual freedom, take children from their biological fathers and/or mothers in order that they might piecemeal a family of their own--in an unnatural sort of way. They may turn to sperm, egg, or embryo donors. Or they may request sexual favors using more intimate means--in order to generate offspring for piecemeal families. The intentions behind the sexual favors may be open or deceitfully hidden.

Identity, however, cannot be destroyed or changed. It is what it is. A child's genogram does not change, nor does anything else about the innate identity shared by the biological mother and father.

If one really understands the identity of a child and the responsibility of parents to their biological children, then the unnatural agendas used to create piecemeal families as such could only be identified as selfish. It is not in the best interest of the child--nor the biological parents who, I believe, owe their offspring their utmost care and concern. 

Why take a child from his or her father? Why disregard the identity of a child created at conception? Who do we think we are to say we can redefine nature? It is not so, nor ever will be. No child is a child of itself. A child will always be a child of a father and a mother. If a child's father is a living and capable human being, the child should not be fatherless, but should know his or her biological father. 

Those children who have been removed from their fathers for other reasons--death or incompetence of the father, etc.--are fatherless in the same right. Let us not exacerbate the problem of the fatherless by disregarding the natural identity of a child. 

If a child who has reached an adult age--18 to 21 years--removes him or herself from his or her father (and/or mother), then that is an entirely different situation. Yet I would not support the idea that such a situation is normal or desirable. 

Though the scripture specifically speaks of the fatherless, I believe it is a worthy cause to defend the motherless as well, in the same manner.




Father's Day Awareness


A couple of studies quoted by Ryan Anderson in his Daily Signal article "Celebrate Father's Day, Not Parent Day" (above) support the importance of recognizing and respecting the natural identity of a child: 

A study published by the left-leaning research institution Child Trends concluded: “it is not simply the presence of two parents…but the presence of two biological parents that seems to support children’s development.” According to another study, "the advantage of marriage appears to exist primarily when the child is the biological offspring of both parents."
Janice Crouse's recent article in the Washington Times, "New research reminds us why fathers matter: What's different about dads in kids' upbringing?" (above), validates the idea that fathers, and especially biological fathers, are irreplaceable. 

"The research is very clear," says Crouch, "that children definitely do need a father, and preferably their biological one, and not just any man. They need involved, hands-on fathering that cements the connection to the man responsible for their birth."

"There's nothing new about this need," she says, "but recent research has shown us some fascinating wrinkles on old themes. Fathers, the new research reveals, bring certain factors to parenting that are irreplaceable."

I know this is true. Perhaps I will have to come back to this post to share my experience with my fathers, my biological and step-father, to relate a more tangible example of the influence of the presence and absence of my fathers to you. But for now, know that I couldn't agree more with Crouse's final words:

"Mentors and father-figures are needed, but they are not sufficient to meet a child's need to experience the touch of their dad's hand, his unconditional love and his voice reassuring him or her, 'You are my son, you are my daughter . . . and I love you and am proud of you.'"

This father's day if you have an involved father that loves and cherishes you and you know it, honor him so that he can feel your appreciation. But don't forget those who are without fathers. If you have been given much, then it is upon you to give as you have been given:


Because I Have Been Given Much I Too Must Give...


Books to Read:










***I recommend reading the reviews on the books to get a well-rounded perspective on them before reading them, as well as checking the validity of the studies mentioned in them and in the newsletters. I quoted a few studies in this post but just haven't had time to look them up and check for their validity. If any of you have time I welcome your feedback on their validity in the comments. Otherwise I will get to it eventually. I apologize in advance if any of the studies are found to be poorly designed :) You never know :)