Monday, May 14, 2012

Banning Mother's Day

In a stunning admission, last week the President of the United States declared women to be worthless. By "coming out" in favor of gay marriage, Barak Obama revealed his fundamental belief that two men are able to constitute the completeness that has been traditionally seen as only possible through the union of a man to a woman. Thus, of all the jobs in society in which women could claim that men cannot replace them, their role of being the unique counterpart of a man seemed safely intact; but no longer. Now, for the first time in history, a U.S. President has declared that two men are just as complete as a man and a woman. The woman is therefore entirely replaceable in this role.

Ramifications of this assertion stretch inevitably much further though...

If the "completeness" of two men (or two women) can be equated in his mind with the completeness of a man and a woman, then logically there exists no difference of quality in the parenting of a gay marriage to that of a traditional marriage. Two men can parent just as well as a man and a woman might. Thus a woman, in her most fundamental role as a mother, is replaceable there as well. There is no escaping it. With all things being equal (i.e. income, education, non-abusive, etc.), if the gay couple can parent just as well as the traditional couple, then mother's are just plainly overrated. Oh of course I realize this applies to fathers as well if two women can rear children as well as could occur in a home with a mother and a father.

But I seek to demonstrate the irony of having just celebrated Mother's Day, having also heard certain mothers praise the President's announcement last week. I'm shocked by how flippantly they were willing to offend themselves in this manner. To support the marriage of two men, with the potential for them to adopt a child (they're not really designed to make their own), is for a woman to simultaneously declare herself irrelevant in the child-rearing process. Children simply do not need mothers as much as we've previously thought. In fact, these mothers are declaring that children don't need them AT ALL. Children don't need booboos kissed or stories read at bedtime. They don't need to be nursed as infants, or even birthed for that matter. If two men can marry and raise children as effectively as a traditional couple, then there isn't any remaining skill that a woman brings to the table that is not replaceable by a man.

When the President made his announcement, certain members of the news media suggested that those who opposed him were not yet "in the 21st century." In light of this, if indeed those asserting that traditional couples, not gay couples, is the norm that should receive societal recognition, then Mother's Day is a nostalgic reminiscing to a throwback era as well. It should therefore be banned, because it's very existence is oppressive. An entire day dedicated to asserting the bygone notion that mothers make a unique contribution to child development? Bigotry!

In solidarity with President Barak Obama, I call for a general ban on Mother's Day as a national celebration. Yes...to be fair...I'll give up Father's Day too. I realize I'm replaceable by a woman also when two women marry. I cannot fight the logic of it any further, and I don't want to be on "the wrong side of history." Nor do I want to be guilty of the hypocrisy of suggesting that mother's bring anything of value to the table, and at the same time suggesting a man can do it just as well. Indeed, if gay marriage is to be equated with traditional marriage, then suggesting that either sex (as mothers or fathers) perform anything uniquely beneficial in the home must be discarded to be consistently "progressive" in our thinking.

No comments: