This is an excellent review of Douglas Farrow’s A Nation of Bastards by Ottawa’s own Richard Bastien. At the end of his review, you will note that he correctly identifies contraception and the contraceptive mentality as largely responsible for the mess we are in today.
As Farrow explains, “it is not by accident that Bill C-38 [the Canadian legislation on same-sex marriage], and its consequential amendments, dismantles the language of ‘natural parent’, ‘blood relationship’ and the like – language that acknowledges implicitly the priority of the family to the state – in favor of terms such as ‘legal parent’ and ‘legal parent-child relationship’.”
Thus, same-sex marriage reduces not only marriage, but the complete web of family relations, to a legal construct. Marriage and family must now be viewed as creatures of the state rather than as natural institutions whose existence is acknowledged by it and that limit its jurisdiction over individual lives. In Farrow’s words, same-sex marriage “has effectively made every man, woman, and child a chattel of the state, by turning their most fundamental human connections into mere legal constructs at the state’s disposal”.
This being said, there is one big question that Farrow leaves unanswered: why did homosexuals wait until the beginning of the 21st Century to assert that homosexual acts are entitled to the same legitimacy as are heterosexual relations in the context of marriage? The answer, I think, is the contraceptive mentality that is so deeply embedded in our culture. Destroying the link between the unitive and procreative ends of the one-flesh union necessarily leads to the unlinking of marriage and procreation. Under these circumstances, there is no reason to stop two people from marrying even when procreation is, by nature, impossible for them. If men and women can marry and not have children, why can’t homosexuals marry and not have children?
Attempts to highlight the negative impact of same-sex marriage on the family and the well-being of children have so far failed. Married people who contracept have embraced the view that sex is purely recreational. While somewhat embarrassed at the thought that the legal framework legitimizing the union of two homosexual persons is the same as that used for themselves, heterosexual couples have no grounds for objecting to its extension. They know that, in order to object to homosexual marriage, they would have to reaffirm the link between the unitive and procreative ends of one-flesh union, ie, to stop contracepting.
Unwilling to do so, they simply hold their noses and approve same-sex marriage. In short, the contraceptive lobby, whose outreach is currently quasi-universal, bears at least as much responsibility for the legitimization of same-sex marriage as does the homosexual lobby. There is a deep cultural dimension to the same-sex marriage issue that ought not to be ignored. (Source)
As for Farrow himself, back in 2005 he predicted that children would become mere chattels of the State if same-sex “marriage” was passed into law and that our inalienable rights to our children would be reduced to mere “legal rights” and these so-called legal rights would eventually supercede the natural claims of biology.
After all, if marriage is not based on biology, why should the stewardship of our children be? One goes with the other. Either it’s biology for both or biology for neither, right? Right.
It is not implausible in the future that a biological father or mother could lose their rights to their children because some sick and perverse judge decides that a particular relationship a child has with another person supercedes “mere” biology. You know, “love” and “understanding” will be used to sever biology and nature from the law so that all relationships are reduced to the realm of the arbitrary, where mere “feelings” and “relationships” trump common sense and logic.
Click below to listen to Dr. Farrow’s speech. It’s about 7.5 minutes (a little long), but he does a very good job in predicting what is happening today – not yet 2 years after he gave this prophetic speech on Parliament Hill.