Manif Pour Tous: Don’t Lie To Children

Family Sign Don't Lie Med PinkThere were massive marches for marriage in France last November and this past January to protest a law legalizing marriage between same- sex couples and their adoption of children. Robert Oscar Lopez tracked the events and provided English translation. The French focused on the impact on children from redefining marriage and were insistent on a child’s right to both a mother and father. Lopez wrote, “In France, a repeating refrain is “the rights of children trump the right
to children.”

The French protests were quite different from what has happened in the U.S. because there was a clear recognition by those with different political philosophies and beliefs, including homosexuals, that marriage is conjugal and that it is vital for the well-being of children to have a mom and dad. David Azerrad comments on this at The Heritage Foundation in How The French Are Fighting For Marriage, and writes that they’re getting ready for another Manif Pour Tous, March For All, on March 24, two days before the March For Marriage on March 26 in Washington, D.C. (I have had problems with the Heritage Foundation link, and I’ve redone it twice. If the embedded link doesn’t work, here’s the link: The French marriage movement, La Manif Pour Tous: The March For All, is also on Facebook.

Because the French protestors understood and believed so strongly that children have a right and a need for a mother and a father, not only did they object to the adoption of children by same-sex couples, but they denounced artificial insemination and surrogate motherhood. I’ve given a number of quotes below so you can get an overview of their thinking. There’s common sense and some moving statements. If you follow the links, let me say up front that it’s certainly not homophobic to say that same-sex activity is wrong—any extra-marital sex is wrong.

Robert Oscar Lopez was reared by two lesbians, one of whom was his biological mother. The marches in France were an epiphany for him, and he’s been writing prolifically on why redefining marriage and same-sex parenting are wrong. He posted translations from video of the January ““manif pour tous” or “march for all,” pitted against the pro-same-sex marriage movement called “marriage for all.””

People cheering, “one dad, one mom, that’s good for kids.”…

A bearded young man says, “This is of utmost importance, the right of a child to a mother and father. Our while [sic] society is organized around this. That is how a society manages [I’m paraphrasing — ROL].”

Signs say, “all are born of man and woman.”

Young woman says, “[…] As my sign says, no fictions in our lineage […] That is to say, don’t lie to children. Two men don’t make a child. That would be a lie.”…

A young man: “Human traits are issued from sperm and egg. That’s how it goes. It’s based on masculinity and femininity. It you want to come up with some other way, that’s quite boldly done to satisfy the whims of somebody. It clashes simply with reality. The reality is a child belongs with the people who gave it life. The law should protect that. If one wants to say that marriage serves to recognize people’s feelings, okay, but there are certain limits. The feeling might be strong, but it might not be one with reality.”

From Marie-Thérèse Hermange, Honorary Senator from Paris:

This is a law that denies reality and institutionalizes a lie. It lays down a lie for couples, and for children. All of you know this: this law will uncouple biological procreation from social reproduction, and this will institute a vulnerable situation for the children. We will seek to counter this.

From the public reading of an open letter to the French president:

The marriage for all is a juridical denial of the most elementary reality of humanity, constituted as it is “man and woman”, the only union naturally capable of siring new life.

You, President of the Republic — Will you be the one to float a travesty–that a human being can be born of two men or of two women?

“Marriage for all” inscribes fundamental discrimination into our law among children, an inequality between children who will be born of a mother and a father, and children who will be born of two fathers, and children who will be born of two mothers.

You, President of the Republic — Will you be the one to abolish the basic equality of birth among children? The marriage for all is also, finally, the reduction of men to nothing more than anonymous sources of sperm, and the subjugation of women pressured to rent out their wombs.

You, President of the Republic, will you be the one to abolish the parity of mother and father in the education of a child?

Anne-Claude Girard wrote this poignant appeal in her Open letter from adopted children to France. It is a moving insight into the price that children pay for the desires of adults.

Today, this same Republic is about to pass a law that would open adoption to same-sex couples. The law would eliminate the right for those who were guaranteed a mother and father before….

If we were not raised by those who conceived us, with a father and a mother who adopted us, we build our selfhood by understanding that we could have been the child of their love.

Our lineage is comparable to that of the two adoptive parents; this understanding is essential to make us who we are. I understood in becoming myself a mother, that that had been a fundamental stage of my development.

A number of professionals have explained to you how much the wound of being abandoned inspires, among adopted children, a tireless search for their origins.

How then can it even be conceived — to give an abandoned child to a same-sex couple? That is to condemn the child forever to the double doubt:

“why was I abandoned, and why do I not have a dad and a mom?”

…This fight is about those who have known the frailty of the state of abandon- ment, who are different, and who deserve to build themselves up within a home of father-mother-child.

From an article in Boulevard Voltaire, published in the form of an open letter to “adamant defenders of insemination and surrogacy.”

…parents are not simple custodians of fungible burros. They are branch and root, genesis and point of reference. From incontestable genetic parentage flows a spiritual and fleshly link….

We are copious contentions that there are plenty families without “mom and dad”: widowhood and single-parent households are often the causes of such. Learn that between accepting the hardship life causes us and knowingly causing it by choosing to force a child to be born outside of these reference points, there lies a great difference: willfulness. The first circumstance is thrust onto a person, while the second is selfishly brought about.

Contrast the above quotes with this news item from CNS News: DOJ: Children Do Not Need—and Have No Right to–Mothers.

The Obama Justice Department is arguing in the United States Supreme Court that children do not need mothers.The Justice Department’s argument on the superfluity of motherhood is presented in a brief the Obama administration filed in the case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended California’s Constitution to say that marriage involves only one man and one woman.

The Justice Department presented its conclusions about parenthood in rebutting an argument made by proponents of Proposition 8 that the traditional two-parent family, led by both a mother and a father, was the ideal place, determined even by nature itself, to raise a child.

The Obama administration argues this is not true. It argues that children need neither a father nor a mother and that having two fathers or two mothers is just as good as having one of each.

The French recognize the truth, “Un enfant, bien sûr, a besoin d’un papa et d’une maman!”
“A child, of course, needs a dad and a mom!” For children their parents “are branch and root, genesis and point of reference.”

Don’t lie to children.
I created the image, “Don’t Lie To Children,” based on the design of those I saw in a photograph in Minnesotans March for Marriage (Our Turn Next), NOM Marriage News. My thinking is that they picked up the idea from the young French woman who used it on her sign in the Manif Pour Tous—March For All. Update: I changed the sign background color to pink since it’s being used by La Manif Pour Tous on their signs and banners.


What are your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s