weigh in on a FB comment

[quinny]

There's a comment on FB regarding Romney's 'gay people are even having babies (paraphrase)' article.

Original post:
"He's right, in that every human child does in fact, biologically, have a mother and a father...

But family is just as much about who loves you as it is who bears you, and love comes in more ways than just one father and one mother. "

responses:
" I agree with you chris, remember too there are many people out there, straight, gay, bi, whatever, who are not reliabe and consistent on love alone... papers and genetics are there to protect the children and ensure responsibility."

"lets not cloud the issue. he was speaking to changing the words mother and father, to parent A and parent B on birth certificates. Then stated that every child has the RIGHT to know who their mother and father is."

------
This immediately got my back up. I don't consider N's donor his 'father'. What would you say? Is father a biological term?

(they are extremely gay friendly and most were at my wedding)

[mk]

For me, no, father is not a biological term. To the general public? Probably.

[twotrue]

To me? No. In legal terms? Almost always.

Every child must have a genetic female and genetic male unit to come into existence. Mother and father are just easy terms for people to use. I guess we could say every child has an egg donor and sperm donor but only some children have a mother and father.

So I guess father can probably have different definitions based on the context. When speaking about genetics every kid has a father (male). When speaking about family units, not every child does.

IDK, am I making sense?

[clickerish]

I think "father" is often considered in the biological sense, yes, because it comes from the verb "to father" which etymologically is linked to ancestral connotations. In that case, it really does have to do with biology. These days it's morphed into being used non-biologically as well, but I wouldn't get upset with someone saying a child has a right to know his or her biological ancestry using the term "father." That doesn't mean I think Romney was necessarily using it in a purely genetic way, but it's not possible from that speech alone to judge (from the sum of his positions, probably).

[quinny]

I can't believe we don't have more scientific words for mother and father. I hadn't thought about it until I saw that post and was wracking my brain for another term but couldn't come up with one. Shocking that such a heavy, emotional word(s) are used to explain biology.

[hensmum]

The problem is that Romney did not say everyone has a right to KNOW who their mother or father is, but that everyone has a right TO a mother and a father.
A birth certificate is not a genetics report. It is a legal record that shows the names of the parents of a child - the people who have a claim to rights over that child.
If a single woman gets pregnant from a hook up, and the "father" doesn't even know abou it, she can choose to designate "unknown" on the birth certificate. Because that random guy is not her baby's "father."
I know there are holes in this argument - but it feels similar to me.
When you get pregnant from a sperm donor, there IS NO father. That man surrendered legal rights in a signed contract. But your child certainly has two parents, who should absolutely both be on the birth certificate.
Since Romney's term as governor has ended, there are no longer such hoops to jump through to get accurate birth certificates, and the fabric of society, shockingly, has not come unraveled.

Jean, you are right to feel defensive about those comments. Romney's quote is the worst kind of bigotry - completely dismissive of the very realness of our families. Your friend(s) no matter how gay friendly clearly don't understand the power of the subtle and not so subtle discrimination we face every day.

[ct]

Well said B.

[2brides]

Yep, B.

We had this issue with the kids' PK teachers aide, who told the class that everyone had a mother and a father - even if you didn't know them/live with them. Ahem. I know that she was coming from a biological perspective and that yes, it takes parts from both a male and a female to create a child, but she wasn't teaching biology to a bunch of 4 year olds. Needless to say, we addressed that quickly.