More Anti-Family Legislation: AB 1349 to Redefine Fatherhood

AB 1349, the third of an unholy trinity of bills introduced or co-sponsored by California anti-family homosexual activists is now before the state senate. The three bills are SB 48, AB 499, and AB 1349. All three bills are opposed by the California Catholic Bishops.

SB 48, co-sponsored by Equality California and by openly homosexual State Senator Mark Leno (D-SF) will change K-12 textbooks to reflect “historical information about the gay rights movement.” In a December 13, 2010 Equality California press release Senator Leno was quoted "Most textbooks don't include any historical information about the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) movement, which has great significance to both California and U.S. history.” Even the liberal Los Angeles Times is opposed to SB 48, on the grounds that “Politicians should not be in the business of writing textbooks.”

A second bill is AB 499, introduced by Assemblywoman Toni Atkins (D-SD). Ms. Atkins is a same-sex "married" open homosexual. AB 499 would allow children 12 years and older to be vaccinated for contagious and specifically venereal diseases without the consent of their parents.

The third bill is AB 1349, introduced by Assemblyman Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo), and co-sponsored by Equality California. Bill May, of Catholics for the Common Good, writes:

“AB 1349 is a bill that is intended to redefine fatherhood for children born to unmarried mothers. It undermines the entire notion of natural parenthood. It also undermines the rights of fathers and the internationally recognized right of every child to know and, as far as possible, be cared for by his or her biological mother and father … When a child is born to an unmarried mother, biological fathers are currently encouraged to file a declaration of paternity, which the State Department of Child Support Services indicates helps children ‘gain the same rights and privileges of a child born within a marriage. Some of those rights include: financial support from both parents, access to important family medical records, access to the non-custodial parent's medical benefits, and the emotional benefit of knowing who both parents are.’

AB 1349 is in direct conflict with the goods intended by voluntary paternity declarations. The legislature should carefully consider this and the other wide-ranging and unintended consequences of this bill.

This bill provides mothers with inordinate power for depriving a child of a relationship with his or her father by controlling access to the child and laying the groundwork for having a voluntary declaration of paternity set aside using the criteria included in the bill. It is wrong to give any one person so much power in a proceeding that is adjudicating the rights of both parents and the child.

This bill would provide that a voluntary declaration of paternity is invalid if, at the time the declaration was signed, the child already had a presumed parent, as specified, or if the man signing the declaration is a sperm donor.”

There is, however, a stipulation in AB 1349 which protects the “rights” of sperm donors who specifically intend through this unnatural means to beget children. Sacramento’s Around the Capitol analysis of the bill says "This bill would enable a sperm donor to be treated as a natural father if it is agreed to in writing signed by the donor and the woman prior to the conception of the child." This cut-out would seem to be designed for male homosexuals. It is pretty well attested that normal men actually enjoy the traditional way of creating children—only homosexual men or an extraordinarily small number of heterosexual men would resort to sperm donation.

The genesis of AB 1349 may be in the Quale/Smith case of 2009. A brief history: Kim Smith and Maggie Quale were two Santa Cruz lesbian women who decided they wanted to have children. A man named Shawn Wallace was used as a sperm donor to impregnate Ms. Quale. She became a mother; he became a father. Ms. Quale gave birth to twins. Six months later Ms. Quale and Ms. Smith broke up. Ms. Quale then began a romantic relationship with the father, Mr. Wallace. Ms. Quale then limited contact between Ms. Smith and the children. Ms. Smith then filed an action against Ms. Quale. On February 1, 2010, the Advocate online newspaper reported: “Representing Smith, Deborah Wald of the National Center for Lesbian Rights calls the case ‘a very dangerous precedent for lesbian couples having children with the assistance of known sperm donors’ if custody is not awarded to Smith.” Eventually, the two women arrived at a settlement that acknowledged the rights of both as “parents” to the children.

All three bills are part of an ongoing campaign to undercut the natural family, its authority, and its definition. For the “equality” sought by homosexual activists to be successfully imposed on society, radical redefinitions of the family, of motherhood, and of fatherhood are required. AB 1349 does that. The embracing of unhealthy sexuality requires children to be freed from the healthy effect of their parent’s wisdom. AB 499 does that. Finally, a program of indoctrination will be necessary in schools. SB 48 does that.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney