(LifeSiteNews) – Here’s an unpopular truth: Gay conservatives (GayCons) who engage in same-sex “marriage” and mono-gendered-couple-parenting are currently doing vastly more to undermine the bedrock of society than they are to strengthen movement conservatism. Yet for the most part, they have been welcomed with open arms into that movement.
This is a very big deal, but few conservatives – especially among our elite thought and political leaders – have the will or even the interest to address these towering issues of enormous consequence. They would rather shrug their shoulders and applaud a known evil than fight like men on behalf of children.
Dave Rubin and his “husband” Dave Janet’s announcement in March about the impending birth of their two children was met with fawning congratulatory wishes from many high profile conservatives. It was and continues to be an appalling spectacle.
RELATED: Gay conservative Dave Rubin sparks controversy for announcing he’s getting 2 babies via surrogacy
While I am not counted among the elites, I am a former gay man willing to say what Dr. Jordan Peterson, the many religious and social conservatives who participated at last year’s National Conservative Conference (Nat Con 2), and plenty of others, including 47 Republicans in the House of Representatives who just voted to enshrine same-sex marriage as a matter of national law lack the courage and clear-headedness to say:
To actually be loving fathers, homosexual couples such as Rubin and Janet have a single course of action available to them to guarantee the happiness, security, and well-being of their soon-to-be-born children: They must dissolve their “marriage” and wed the mother of their children.
And that of course is far more complicated than it sounds because both of their children come from not one but two mothers: An egg donor mom and a surrogate mom who carried him or her in her womb for nine months. One is the genetic mom and the other is the nurturing, gestational mom.
Rubin and Janet’s rationale for utilizing surrogacy – insisting on the importance of carrying on their genetic lines so they might see themselves in their kids – is the ultimate in arrogant adolescent narcissism.
To Dave and David:
Dave and David, if you don’t choose to dissolve your mono-gendered union, do not pretend that you’re great fathers or part of the new conservative movement; you’re nothing more than wealthy elites engaging in social experimentation in order to prove that you can outwit nature. Put a little differently: You’re trying to demonstrate to the world that you are a normal married couple. But you aren’t.
In fact, this whole very public “We’re going to be dads” drama displays to the world that the opposite is true.
Here’s the thing: Your actions so far prove that you’re incapable of empathizing with your children’s most basic need and right – a genuine, life-long relationship with their mothers – an act that will inflict unspeakable harm on them.
You are not conservative role models or heroes: You are the worst kind of 21st century misogynists. You’re in the same league as the male athletes who claim to be transgender in order to dominate female sports.
Jennifer Roback Morse, founder of the Ruth Institute, which helps the victims of the Sexual Revolution, recently noted, “These men have broken motherhood, the most fundamental human relationship, into a series of functions. They’ve transformed mother, an organic, integrated personal reality, into something artificial, scattered and impersonal.”
Men – real men – protect women and children. They don’t sacrifice them on the altars of the Sexual Revolution and vain, imagined genetic imperatives. Men don’t dismiss women as nothing more than “breeders.” They don’t exploit them to enhance and adorn their own lives, they don’t commodify them, and they certainly don’t discard them as medical waste when a child’s anticipated physical irregularities or medical problems dash one’s expectations of perfection.
Because of your unwillingness to marry – instead preferring to imitate marriage – and to produce children by having natural sex with your wives, your children to be born are motherless victims, and you are their victimizers.
You have replaced the role of their mothers with a small army of other women: Your egg donor(s), your surrogates, your female family members and other daytime caretakers, your night nurses, and your breast milk providers.
Sadly, your wife could have performed all these roles and done so brilliantly while also establishing the natural maternal bond your children will so desire. But nothing you are doing is even close to being deemed natural. You are creating a synthetic pro-homosexual, misogynist environment for your kids.
Roback Morse summed up your type of dereliction of duty while simultaneously offering the perfect, elegantly simple solution to your tangled web of synthetic motherhood: ”The first duty of fatherhood is to love your child’s mother. Indeed, that is the ordinary way of becoming a father in the first place.”
The picture above is not a portrait of two husbands, because neither has a wife. These are two unrelated men who handed their sperm over to an IVF clinician. Neither love nor nature had anything to do with the conception and gestation of their children.
On a continuum of evil
Same-sex “marriage” has led to a cascade of unspeakable evil.
After the 47 House Republicans voted two weeks ago to pass the Respect for Marriage Act that aims to prevent states from discontinuing the recognition of same-sex “marriages,” GayCon commentator Andrew Sullivan, “married” to a man since 2007, chided National Review (NR) editors for suggesting that same-sex “marriage” had unleashed the contagion of transgenderism.
“‘The bullying, unfairness, and sheer illogic of the trans movement have all drawn strength from same-sex marriage.’ What a self-evidently absurd statement. What a completely reactionary editorial,” tweeted Sullivan.
Yet the NR editors are correct, and Sullivan is catastrophically wrong.
Rubin, Janet, and others who have pursued a similar path — including Sullivan, former Trump Administration National Security Director Ric Grenell, PayPal founder Peter Thiel, and other high profile GayCons — have unwittingly situated themselves on a continuum of diabolic evil.
In 2008, Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. wrote:
We are not dealing with a group of separate issues—marriage, fornication, adultery, contraception, abortion, in vitro conceptions, surrogate mothers, frozen fetuses, divorce, artificial insemination, stem cells, gay activities, sperm and ova providers, population control, infanticide, euthanasia, human experimentation, polygamy, gene-enhanced babies, parental selection of child features, selective elimination of retarded children, and on and on. These are not really different issues. One follows from another once the initial step is taken.
Together, these all join to weave a giant tapestry of rejection of God.
“The spirit of ‘I will not serve,’ first manifested by a famous character in Genesis, has been behind this logic all along,” wrote Fr. Schall. “One ‘I will not serve’ quickly leads to another, even if they seem to appear haphazardly.”
Interestingly, Fr. Schall didn’t foresee that transgenderism would, just a few years later, capture and devour young people by the thousands, often with their own parents tossing their own kids at drag queens in the same way Canaanite parents once tossed their children into the fiery furnace of the deity Moloch.
The reckless, fallacious assertions of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision
Writing for the majority in the Obergefell case, Justice Anthony Kennedy imprudently promoted child-endangering fallacies, asserting that the only way that homosexuals can find fulfillment is to form non-conjugal, non-complementary “marriages,” and that without same-sex “marriage,” children of homosexuals “suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser.”
Both assertions were lies. Same-sex attracted men and women certainly can and do find fulfillment in marriage to the opposite sex.
Worse, the U.S. Supreme Court traded the presumed stigma of children’s experience while being raised by same-sex couples for the untold suffering inflicted by mother or father deprivation.
What is likely shocking news to the legacy media-informed general public is that while the presence of children has a stabilizing effect for opposite-sex couples, it more often than not has the opposite impact on same-sex relationships.
Mark Regnerus, Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, recently explained how volatile life can be for kids of same-sex “marriages”:
A 2020 study of over 1.2 million children in the (gay-friendly) Netherlands, whose primary media message trumpeted how same-sex parents were better than opposite-sex parents, nevertheless revealed that 55 percent of children living with same-sex parents—the vast majority of which were female couples—experienced the separation of these parents, well above the 19 percent of children of opposite-sex parents who experienced the same.
What’s more, Regnerus noted that woke social scientists find ways to promote same-sex parenting while ignoring the injurious impact on kids:
“Controlling” for such instability—in effect implying it doesn’t matter—clears the way to proclaim the benefits of same-sex parents. It’s a common statistical practice, but a deceptive one.
Regnerus continued:
[A] 2020 published reexamination of three nationally representative datasets from the United States and Canada revealed that the presence of children tended to stabilize opposite-sex couples but destabilize same-sex couples. Dissolution rates were 43 percent for same-sex couples, but only 8 percent for opposite-sex couples. Its authors agree, saying that “parental instability is an important factor through which parents’ sexual orientation influences children’s outcomes.”
Following the U.S. House vote on the homosexual “marriage” bill, Katy Faust, founder of Them Before Us, an organization which seeks to give children a much-needed voice in the debate over family structure, warned:
For conservative politicians & pundits, man/women marriage is falling out of fashion.
But not for kids. They’re falling asleep wishing their parents would get back together or wondering where their dad went.
Don’t allow your priorities to out-progress the needs of children.
For conservative politicians & pundits, man/women marriage is falling out of fashion.
But not for kids. They’re falling asleep wishing their parents would get back together or wondering where their dad went.
Don’t allow your priorities to out-progress the needs of children.
— Katy Faust (@Advo_Katy) July 23, 2022
Motherless and fatherless children “are being victimized by bad legal decisions like Obergefell; by bad cultural ideas, like love makes a family and biology is irrelevant and gender is irrelevant; and by bad technological developments that legally or technologically allow for a mother or father to be cut out at the moment of conception,” Faust told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins in a video interview.
As they grow, though they will live amid wealth, the about to be born Rubin-Janet kids will realize that they have been victimized in all these ways.
