PARENT'S RIGHTS NOW!

In the first instance, Mary Cheney's Dad is going to be a grandfather, proving blood is thicker than water and that in some small way, politics that divides families may have actually advanced a bit since 1865.

In the second instance, it looks like the Judeo-Christian beliefs that formed the foundation for this country may have just added another brick. But it is interesting to note that they have approved "the celebration of same-sex commitment ceremonies" and not used the term "marriage." Whatever small difference that may make is beyond my comprehension. But it does seem to imply more of a civil type recognition that this is happening rather than putting the union under the umbrella of a marriage in the traditional term.

Finally, if two women can have a child together and the Court rules that they can have, what appears to be joint custody, why shouldn't joint custody be the de facto standard in male/female custody fights rather than sole custody as is currently the case in most, if not all, states?
 

We were not trying to embroil ourselves in a philosophical debate about whether gay unions should be allowed. Nor were we trying to mount an indirect attack on Vice-president Cheney. Rather, we were trying to call attention to the fact that there is much confusion in this area as well as a need for clarification and perhaps some uniformity. For example, what are the rights of the biological father of Mary Cheney’s baby? Should those rights be governed by contract or by statute? What about the rights of the child to know his father?

As to the question of joint custody, we agree that reform is needed and that joint custody should be the default position of the Family Court at least in all no-fault divorces.