Saying sorry means not doing it again...
The bond between mother & child was broken, and we have apologised:
"The most primal and sacred bond there is - the bond between a mother and her baby"
The primal bond between mother and child will be broken again,
if we institute marriage without a woman
which creates families without a mother.
Who will apologise to the Motherless Generation?
In March 2015 the anniversary of an old injustice and the prospect of a new injustice both came into public view.
The second anniversary of the National Apology for Forced Adoption was on 21 March. It was a noble moment in 2013 when our then Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, spoke to the nation about "the most primal and sacred bond there is: the bond between a mother and her baby".
Our then Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, also affirmed "there is no stronger bond than that between mother and child".
Both leaders apologised for a misguided policy that had broken this primal bond and caused ongoing grief to mothers and children.
How hypocritical, then, that just five days after the anniversary a new policy to break that primal bond was scheduled to come before the Senate. It was a policy that would institute marriage without a woman, and so create families without a mother.
Senator David Leyonhjelm’s Freedom to Marry Bill 2014 was withdrawn from the Senate at the last minute, after two million emails urging the Government to keep marriage between man and woman.
The Bill will return and, if passed, would be a coldly calculated Act of Parliament to abolish a mother from the lives of any future children created within two-man ‘marriage’. The most primal and sacred bond would be broken again.
Of course, some children already miss out on a mother through death or separation - but nobody would ever wish that loss on a child. No government should ever impose that loss on a child - and yet Senator David Leyonhjelm’s Bill asks our political leaders to do just that.
The challenge our TV ad puts to our fellow Australians is:
Learn from our mistakes. Protect the primal bond between mother and baby. Don’t repeat the same injustice against the child by letting two men 'marry' and create motherless children.
Learn from the children of injustice
Just as our leaders in 2013 stopped to listen to the parents and children whose family bonds were violated through forced adoption, so they must stop and listen to parents and children whose family bonds have been violated by same-sex ‘parenting’.
Their voices have been loud this month.
Those adult stories are now emerging.
Heather Barwick, raised in a loving same-sex household, made international headlines when she wrote this month, “Same-sex marriage and parenting withholds either a mother or father from a child while telling him or her that it doesn’t matter. That it’s all the same. But it’s not. A lot of us, a lot of your kids, are hurting.”
Even bigger international headlines, and absurd accusations of homophobia, were made when gay fashion icons Dolce and Gabbana said this month, "We oppose gay adoptions… You are born to a mother and a father – or at least that’s how it should be… Life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed.”
In support of their comments, six adults raised in same-sex households wrote in an open letter, “Every human being has a mother and a father, and to cut either from a child’s life is to rob the child of dignity, humanity, and equality”.
Here in Australia on talkback radio this fortnight, I heard from a gay barrister working in family law who supported the AMF position against gay marriage and parenting, and a 21 year old woman raised in a lesbian household who expressed her grief as a child and her longing to have a father.
These people speak with authority about gay marriage and parenting - and they tell us a child should have, wherever possible, both a mum and a dad. That is the message of AMF's "Think of the Child" campaign.
It is the position of AMF that no law should deliberately deprive a child of a mother or a father, which is why we are also consistent in opposing surrogacy and adoption rights for same-sex couples – and also for single people.
Any federal law that allows two men to marry guarantees two men the right to “found a family” (Article 16, UDHR) and therefore any state prohibitions on same-sex adoption or surrogacy will fall. That means same-sex marriage is more than symbolic: it is the definitive violation of a child’s birthright to have, where possible, both a mother and a father.
As a nation we broke the primal bond between mother and child through our policy on forced adoption - and we have apologised; we must not break that bond again by a policy for two-man marriage, which forces children to live without a mother.
Otherwise, which future Prime Minister will have to give a National Apology to the ‘Motherless Generation’?”Share