Mary Cheney’s pregnant. Congratulations, Ms. Cheney. I hope you and your long term non-legally bound partner the best of luck. I’m sure you realize that your partner will have no rights to your child, may not be able to visit you in the hospital during childbirth, may not receive custody of your child should you happen to die before your child turns 18, and probably wouldn’t receive life insurance benefits since you can’t get married due to the political positions taken by the people who elected your father.
What will life be like for the Vice President’s grandchild? Will he or she grow up in a world where his or her parents relationship is considered second class? Dick Cheney has stated that issues like gay marriage should be left up to states to decide. Will Mary Cheney and her partner continue to live in Virginia, or will they move their family (thus jobs and taxes) to a more gay-friendly state? While Cheney clearly has the resources to do so, is that the best option we have today for gay couples?
I stumbled across this snippet of illogic over at AmericaBlog:
Carrie Gordon Earll, a policy analyst for the conservative Christian ministry Focus on the Family, expressed empathy for the Cheney family but depicted the newly announced pregnancy as unwise.
“Just because you can conceive a child outside a one-woman, one-man marriage doesn’t mean it’s a good idea,” said. “Love can’t replace a mother and a father.”
It’s hard to find more ass-backwards than that. Can a mother and a father replace love? Based on Earll’s logic, Mary Cheney’s child should be taken from what would likely be a loving relationship in a stable lesbian partnership and given to a married hetrosexual couple.
Potential loophole. Should gay male couples get together with gay lesbian couples, have two legally binding male-female marriages, then go back to living their content gay lives?