Gay parenting is an issue that affects a great number of people worldwide. Although the number is a minority, the issue still causes heated debate. People who are in favor of Gay, Lesbian, and Bi-Sexual parenting rights claim that as long as there is a commitment to parenthood then successful parenting is achievable as a homosexual or bi-sexual. Since within a gay couple there is no chance for accidental pregnancy, the couple must make a conscious decision to become a parent.
People opposed to homosexual parenting argue that homosexual couples are not capable of having long enduring strong relationships required for the successful upbringing of children. They claim it is in the child’s best interest to be raised by one female and one male. Such a family would provide the best environment for healthy intellectual and emotional growth. Obviously the debate over homosexual parenting brings for concepts of individual rights and the definition of family. What the argument boils down to is the definition of a family. With “family” defined there is little argument over who is capable of becoming a parent.
An editorial found in Pride Page, an online gay community news and information cite, offers a defense to the gay, lesbian, and bi-sexual right to parenthood. The article by Brian W. Fairbanks entitled “Gay Parenting is still Parenting” attempts to provide the reader with valid reasons as to why gay couples should be allowed to become parents. Fairbanks believes that the same reason a heterosexual couple should be allowed to have children is greater in homosexual couples. Heterosexual couples are given the right to child-rearing because the are seen as fit to be parents.
Homosexual couples have the advantage. He points out that the only way a homosexual couple could become parents is through actively choosing to become a parent. In no way would it not be planned, unwanted, or unexpected. Fairbanks’ also argues, “it takes love” to make a family and sex is not a part of the equation. The author is clearly very level headed regarding this issue. He doesn’t make outlandish remarks or accuse anyone as being the cause of the problem. He attempts to touch the reader’s heartstrings instead of raising anger. The evidence he presents is quite valid and believable.
He brings forth one fact from the American Bar Association as well as three references to pop culture, which anyone can recognize. The author opens with reference to a quote from Jean Kerr; “Now the thing about having a baby…is thereafter you have it. ” Fairbanks’ argument is that this quote doesn’t “sink in with potential gay parents anymore than it does with many straight ones. ” In other words, he believes that no matter what the sexual orientation people simply don’t realize all that is involved in having children. Parenting is to be taken seriously.
It is hard work which necessitates “selflessness, responsibility, and commitment that few people…are always prepared to give. ” Here the author is trying to put homosexual couples on the same playing field as heterosexual couples. To define what it takes to be a good parent allows the reader to become subjective no matter what the point of view regarding gay parenting. I feel the method Fairbanks used was excellent in forcing myself to look at the true essence of parenting and opened the playing field for any point of view, which he was about to make.
That next point would be regarding the choice of parenthood. Fairbanks claims there is one advantage homosexual couples have over heterosexual couples. There is no need for birth control or abortion and there is no fear of accidental pregnancy. Because of this homosexual couples must make that conscious decision; the intelligent, responsible choice to become a parent. If the parent(s) are willing to give themselves to have a child then, according to Fairbanks, that would make gays just as good of a candidate for parenthood as anyone else.
As long as “the commitment to parenthood is there, successful parenting is wholly within the gay couple’s grasp. ” With successful parenting being defined earlier in his work Fairbanks has made a convincing argument. The author next brings to light moral ideals set by our society. He strongly pokes fun at Dan Quayle’s failed attempt to condemn “Murphy Brown” for having a child out of wedlock. Quayle did not believe that a child could be brought up successfully without the “traditional man-woman household. ” Fairbanks continues, “but the facts prove otherwise.
It is here he mentions data from the Family Pride Coalition. Their data, derived from the American Bar Association, points out that six to ten million American children were brought up around a gay parent. Fairbanks does mention that although these children are product of heterosexual relationships the numbers are climbing. Fairbanks’ refutes his opponents’ claim of gay couples being more “promiscuous and incapable of the kind of lasting, stable relationships that children need by proving that “sexual orientation is not really the issue.
By stating the fact that heterosexual couples are increasingly becoming divorced and thus can’t claim to be more stable than any homosexual relationship, Fairbanks affirms his argument that no matter the sexual preference a chance for instability as a couple is present. He also argues that if gay marriage would be legalized there is a greater potential for increase of committed gay relationships. Fairbanks makes another valuable argument regarding the standard family as is accepted in today’s society.
He notes Quayle’s argument was based on religion, a religion which promotes one male heterosexual, one female heterosexual raising children. Yet, according to Fairbanks, families have “long…defied the accepted norm. ” His proof is that there have been, for some time, multi-racial, multi-generational, single mom, single dad, and foster families. His judgment to be a family comes in the presence of love and acceptance. Underneath all of the controversy over homosexuality Fairbanks wants people to understand that it is not a question of homosexuality but rather one of who is willing and capable of being a good parent.
Fairbanks is successful in conveying his message that love and sacrifice are what’s necessary for proper parenting and that homosexual couples are just as willing, and competent individuals, able to become parents. His final line is very heartfelt. It is the type that stays with you even if you forget what the previous text was about: “Parenting is the most important job in the world, and it’s not for everyone. It takes commitment. It takes sacrifice. Most of all, it takes love. Love, not sex, and gays and lesbians are just as qualified for the job as anyone.
This sums up his view without being demanding or critical of anyone’s personal point of view. I must note that before reading this editorial I had not given much thought into the subject. Because of Fairbanks’ writing I do agree with his view. He has struck a nerve that has caused me to think of homosexual parenting in comparison to my own upbringing. Because Fairbanks’ was writing without a controversial tone I was, in a sense, listening better. I understood his argument and his proof, without being too technical, did cause me to reflect on my own definition of ‘FAMILY. ’
