Monday, March 10, 2008

"Deep" Thought #4: Dead Fathers are Better than Step-Fathers!

Oh. My god. The "Deep" Thoughts category really doesn't get any "deeper" than this next one, dear readers. What follows may, in fact, be the single most-est best-est deepest thought ever in the history of ever!

Anti-gay "intellectual" Fitz has just announced that the empty space left behind from a deceased father is better at raising children than are living non-biological dads.

It is in hopes of catching tidbits of "fact" like that why I continue to peruse the blog Fitz is a part of.

Just.... read:

"Interestingly enough there are several studies that find a Father who passed away to [sic] of greater support than multiple other types of step-families.

This is because natural forces took the Father away rather than abandonment striking the child as the neglect it is/ or divorce that sets a tone about the reliability of relationships.

Augmenting this is [sic] fact that the deceased father figure is held up as an iconic reference to live up to. Especially in the case of a son this can be a powerful message of strength & duty.

I could search for those studies; IMAPP has made several references through the years."

Yes, Fitz. Please do. Please dig up those IMAPP studies that are certainly totally objective and without agenda. But most importantly, this new thesis of Fitz's means that his argument regarding marriage and parenting is essentially this:

All children should be raised by their biological mothers and fathers because biological mothers and fathers are important.

Biological fathers are so important, in fact, that children will turn out just fine if their biological father dies during the child's youth.

Therefore, two people of the same-sex should not raise children together and gay people should not be able to get married.

Oh yeah, and mothers are important too.

In the normal world of logic, Fitz's statement that children with deceased fathers turn out fine would seemingly contradict his persistent argument that all children need fathers to turn out okay. But Fitz is living in Opine-land, that strange universe where logic knows no rules.

And, please excuse me if this next bit is crass, but before I end can I just say that I'm envisioning Fitz desperately trying to prove his thesis in a humorous Weekend at Bernies scenario.

Yes, I can see it now...

Fitz: [propping up dead father] Fathers are SO important. Even when there [sic] dead the Father's spirit lives on.

Child: [Eyeing Fitz with father in horror] I'm scared.

Fitz: The Father is important in teaching honor, strength, and duty. [Fitz, attaches strings to arms and legs of Father like a puppet and makes him flex.]

Child: [Recoiling, the child screams and runs away.]

Fitz: Noooo. Get back here! You must have a father! No other type of parental figure will do! [Chases child while carrying father. Trips over feet of father, they both fall to the ground.] Noooooooo.

You see, when it comes down to it, alternative families pose a threat to Fitz and "the father's" place in the world as head of household, head of society, and head of the universe. Under the guise of protecting families and children, scared men like Fitz are ultimately only seeking to protect their supreme place in the world. (As an interesting aside, read Fitz's argument again and note how he always capitalizes "the Father" when speaking of this very important figure.)

Yeah, Fitz. We all get it. You want biological dads to be The Most Important Parental Figure in the History of the Universe.

"Deep" thoughts.

No comments: