Tom McFeely is the National Catholic Register’s News Editor. He lives in British Columbia.
Homosexual activists campaigning against California’s ballot initiative to define marriage as a heterosexual-only institution claim there are no negative consequences to legalizing same-sex “marriage.”
Not true, say a pair of commentators from Canada who have assessed the adverse effects of Canada’s decision to legalize homosexual “marriage.”
According Canadian social policy analysts Andrea Mrozek and Peter Jon Mitchell, one negative consequence of same-sex “marriage are legal battles that pit the rights of children to have a normal family environments against the “adult desires” of homosexuals recognized by courts as legal “parents” of biological children of their same-sex “spouses.”
Such a case has already occurred in the province of Ontario, where an appeals court ruled in January 2007 that a 5-year-old boy has three parents — his biological father, who fathered the child by artificial insemination, and his biological mother and her lesbian partner.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are also imperiled by legalizing homosexual “marriage,” Mrozek and Mitchell warned.
“California is at a crossroads that Canada has already passed,” they said. “But both north and south of the border, we need to begin to learn about marriage as an institution, and let those lessons lead public policy in the future.”
— Tom McFeely