Lesbians for laws against dads

The Wash. Post reports:

For Rachel Dabney, the right to be legally called a mother would be decided in Docket No. 24-A-12-000043. Whether she would be deemed “fit and proper” to raise the children whose diapers she had been changing for more than a year now rested in the hands of a judge, an inch-thick case file and exhibits A through O. ...

Because [Amy] Rice was the one to give birth, she was, in the eyes of the state at least, the twins’ mother. Dabney was a legal stranger, her name not on the children’s birth certificates.

Thta's right. Rice is the mom, and Dabney is not. Only one mom is listed on the birth certificate.

If Maryland becomes the first state to legalize same-sex marriage by a popular vote next month, the victory would be built in part on a campaign message pushed by Gov. Martin O’Malley. Vote for gay marriage, he often says, “for the kids.”

“We cannot rightly conclude that the children of some parents should have lesser protections under the law than children of other parents,” O’Malley (D) recently told a group of deep-pocketed donors in the District, imploring them to open their checkbooks to fund an ad campaign defending the state’s same-sex marriage law.

This is crazy. As the story explains, Rice and Dabney did successfully use the family court to eliminate the dad from the lives of his twin boys, and the lesbians adopted the boys. Their case is not really an argument for same-sex marriage, except that a change in marriage law would have simplified the legal process for Dabney to make sure the boys grow up without a dad.

The only sensible paragraph in the story is this:

“Marriage provides children the best chance of being raised by a mother and father,” a narrator says in an ad the Maryland Marriage Alliance began airing across the state on Tuesday. “Children do best when raised by their married mom and dad.”

Before you accuse me of being bigoted against a sexual orientation, I don't even believe that these women have a sexual orientation. They are too fat and ugly to find husbands. Most lesbian couples like this do not actually have sex with each other. But I don't care what they do in private.

My objection is to changing the law to facilitate forcing kids to grow up without a dad, and then claiming that this somehow benefits kids.

The newspapers write these stories as if it is some sort of tragedy if some woman, who is not even a parent, has some legal inconvenience in adopting kids. Meanwhile, real parents like me do not even see our kids.

The LGBT lobby has been co-opted by the anti-dad lobby. Am I wrong here? If there is some example of an LGBT organization sticking up for real dads, I would like to hear about it. It sure seems to me that the LGBT lobby is always pushing for laws to enable lesbians to force kids to grow up without their dads.