The Engage Family Blog

Official Blog of The Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Paternal Value

leave a comment »

On March 26, this blog discussed the now infamous story of Thomas Beatie who, halfway through “gender reassignment” decided to artificially inseminate herself and become pregnant. (See the link below for more information.)

This has, of course, generated not a little bit of conversation in the blog world. Today, I read a well-reasoned article by Jeff Robinson on the blog for The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Mr. Robinson makes a significant point:

“While this story is certainly extraordinary, it cannot escape the inescapable truth: Thomas Beatie is not a man; “he,” is a woman, a person who has merely sought to alter his (I use that pronoun in the universal sense denoting ‘personhood’) biological identity; however, the fact that Thomas Beatie is truly a female is absolute, for God did not create men (gender-specific, non-universal sense) with wombs. Women who take testosterone injections will grow beards. Nevertheless, the irony here is that, in spite of a “gender reassignment” procedure, the female body of “Thomas Beatie” is functioning precisely according to God’s design.” (Emphasis mine)

There is no need to belabor (no pun intended) the point; however, I wish to expand upon it briefly.

Not only has Beatie failed to alter God’s physical design, despite their best efforts to pursue an alternative lifestyle, this couple is forced to use the parlance of tradition. As Beatie has said, “To Nancy, I am her husband carrying our child. I will be my daughter’s father, and Nancy will be her mother. We will be a family.”

Clearly, Beatie has redefined the word “family,” even as Beatie has redefined “marriage.” Despite being biologically (and anatomically, apparently) female and a lesbian in the midst of “gender reassignment,” in describing the relationship to be, Beatie is forced to use traditional language. Even Beatie recognizes the need for the new life that will be created to have a father-figure and a mother-figure. If both were not vital to the development of a child, wouldn’t Beatie simply say, “Our child will have two mothers, one with a beard.” (Please do not read that as sarcasm.)

Just as testosterone injections and breast reduction surgeries fail to change one’s biology, acting the role of a man does not a father make. Plainly, the influence of a father is of vital importance to the development of a child. Love, while noble, is incompletely received if not uniquely given from a mother and a father, a female and a male.

Mothers and fathers plainly matter and fulfill human needs that each distinctly offers that the other gender simply cannot. Children are underserved when fatherhood is a pretense to the real thing. Another arrangement is but a poor imitation of complete love.

Advertisements

Written by Jeremy Dys

April 3, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Posted in Marriage

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: