A Few Questions . . .

In the December 13 edition of the Star Tribune, Paul Bridgland of Marshall, MN, poses a number of important and insightful questions in response to a supporter of the Catholic hierarchy's pro-marriage amendment activism. Bridgland's letter is reprinted below.

___________________________________

The Dec. 10 Letter of the Day claimed that the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment would protect the "civil right of children ... to grow up raised by their biological mother and father."

This is a common assertion among amendment supporters. A variation is "every child should be raised by both a father and a mother."

To those claiming to protect the children, I ask the following:

1. Will adoption be illegal under the amendment, since adopted children are denied their "civil right ... to grow up raised by their biological mother and father"?

2. Will a single parent be granted a "grace period" to locate and establish an appropriate two-parent household before the state steps in to restore the civil rights of their children?

3. Will the biological father and mother of every minor child in Minnesota be required to establish a shared household in which their children are raised, regardless of the marital status of the parents? Will the fathers of children by more than one mother be required to establish a separate household with each mother, or one large communal home? What about mothers with children by more than one father?

4. If producing children is an essential part of marriage, will fertility tests be required as part of the marriage license application process?

If you think these questions are absurd, I agree. But so is the claim that the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment has anything at all to do with protecting the interests of children.

The only reason for making that claim is because "I care about children" is easier to say than "I don't think gays should have the same rights I have."

– Paul Bridgland