The American Spectator

Reader Mail

p> FOR THE KIDS br> Re: W. James Antle III's Marital Discord : /p>

W. James Antle writes, "ideally children should be cared for by both biological parents and abandoned by neither." It might also be noted that this ideal not only proscribes same-sex couples but also single parent households, so it is manifestly not an idea reverse-engineered simply to deny "rights" to same-sex couples.

The difficulty in making the case that Mr. Antle suggests be done is that most Americans have been inculcated to deny the above-mentioned ideal. I haven't seen a formal poll of it, but I suspect that a minority of Americans would subscribe to it, and an even smaller minority would agree that government should favor it, e.g., grant tax breaks to the ideal and not others, or grant privileges (adoption) to the ideal and not others.

A not insignificant element in this denial of the ideal is the mass "day caring" of children whose career mother isn't home in the first place. Since we've already rationalized away the need for even one parent to be home for a young child, and accepted as gospel that anybody can serve the role of parent of a young child, what's so special about a natural father and mother unit?

p>In the name of "live and let live," we have denied and destroyed our ideals, and with that the ability to do what is best. br> -- Frank Natoli br> Newton, New Jersey /p>

The California decision clearly illustrates the danger in electing democrats. The radical Left has controlled that pitiful party since the time of George McGovern and never has been able to significantly advance its anti-Christian, anti-American agenda through the legislative process, because Americans won't vote them back in.

topics:
Education, Television, Religion, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, NATO