Perhaps you heard the big news coming out of Canada this week. I don’t mean the recent election that saw the liberal party stage a shocking comeback to take down the almost shoo-in conservative party, though I guess in a roundabout way, voters did just approve more of this same kind of culture-stunting policy from their government. That’s the news I’m actually talking about:
That was the headline from CTV, reporting on the judicial ruling out of Quebec:
A recent court ruling in Quebec has granted multi-parental families in the province the same legal rights as any other unit.
A Quebec Superior Court judge ruled on Friday that limiting the legal affiliation of children to one or two parents is unconstitutional.
For the sarcastic and peevish Christians among us, this could be a tempting moment to sound the “We told you so” gong and roll out all the receipts showing secular progressive assurances that the affirmation of gay “marriage” was “all anyone is asking for,” and that panic about a slippery slope was overwrought and histrionic.
Personally, I remember writing at the time that the revolution wasn’t about “redefining marriage,” which was the consensus term. It was an “undefining” of the institution that was underway, whereby all moral guideposts safeguarding marriage were rendered bigoted and unacceptable. It was selfish and repugnant, we were told, to tell a gay person they couldn’t marry a person they wanted to marry just because it was something we didn’t like.
This weekly Dashboard Jesus > commentary is made possible by our friends at:
But, of course, no one was too keen on answering this question at the time: how do you think you can say out of one side of your mouth, “We need to love people for who they are and let them love who they want to love,” but then turn around and try to tell a “throuple” that they can’t love and marry who they want to love and marry?
So here we are. And where is that, exactly? What will be the consequences of all this culture warring?
From a legal perspective, the word nightmare comes to mind. Divorce litigation is already messy, particularly when children are involved. Imagine the judicial jigsaw puzzle that is coming when attempting to navigate visitation, or the termination of one party’s parental rights when dealing with throuples or other polyamorous groupings. It is no secret that LGBT+ relationships are notoriously unstable and fluid. It is not hard to foresee the backstabbing of one leg of a throuple, seeing it replaced by a new member or members, then being cut off from child custody, destabilizing the children, infuriating the jilted party, and provoking never-ending litigation to establish paternity or maternity, and weighing all of it against the emotional bonds of non-custodial parents, short-term live-in relationships, etc.
From an economic perspective it isn’t much better. Rampant manipulation of this new loophole for accessing child support checks, government subsidies, or parental tax breaks should be anticipated. More lawsuits, more fraud, more taxpayer abuse.
Socially, it is beyond depressing to think of how, once again, the well-being of children is being willfully sacrificed in order to facilitate and feed the desires and lusts of adults. The destabilization of the nuclear family is not just unbiblical; it has been sociologically proven to be a detriment to the health of civil society. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s Barack Obama in 2008: