The Des Moines Register reports:
Justices ruled 6-0 to require that the Iowa Department of Public Health begin listing both married parents on a newborn child’s birth certificate, despite state concerns that biological-based parenting rights would be cast aside if a Des Moines lesbian was allowed to establish paternity of her child.
The opinion, authored by Justice David Wiggins, brushes aside state government arguments that Iowa’s interest in “the accuracy of birth certificates, the efficiency and effectiveness of government administration, and the determination of paternity” require that the state hue to biological definitions in recording a child’s parentage.
Iowa currently keeps no records of biological parentage in cases where heterosexual couples use anonymous sperm donors, the court reasons. And state records would not be more accurate by requiring, as Iowa health officials until now have insisted, that nonbirthing mothers go through an adoption process.
“It is important for our laws to recognize that married lesbian couples who have children enjoy the same benefits and burdens as married opposite-sex couples who have children,” the opinion says. “By naming the nonbirthing spouse on the birth certificate of a married lesbian couple’s child, the child is ensured support from that parent and the parent establishes fundamental legal rights at the moment of birth. Therefore, the only explanation for not listing the nonbirthing lesbian spouse on the birth certificate is stereotype or prejudice.
“The exclusion of the nonbirthing spouse on the birth certificate of a child born to a married lesbian couple is not substantially related to the objective of establishing parentage.”
First Iowa, we reap what we sow. We had the opportunity to boot Justice Wiggins, but the majority decided to keep him in. Secondly, this isn’t about a stereotype or prejudice – it is about biology and common sense. It is biologically impossible for two lesbians to procreate. Iowa’s law already had a remedy for this situation (a remedy for a situation that is unnatural and unhealthy, but it is a remedy nonetheless).
What same-sex couples want is sameness, not equality. In this case it is impossible. I have to wonder what the Court in it’s infinite *wisdom* will decide if and when (a lawsuit is coming no doubt) two gay men push for inclusion for their names to be on a birth certificate when their is a surrogate mother. I’ll admit that I don’t know what is expected for heterosexual couples, but I would hope the expectation is having the non-biological parent go through the adoption process – as should be the case as that would make sense.
But after the Iowa Supreme Court decided to throw out our definition of marriage, common sense has been thrown out the window and the Court’s new role is the creation of rights out of thin air and they can’t keep even little things like biology stand in their way.
Latest posts by Shane Vander Hart (see all)
- A Defense of Christians From an Unlikely Source - December 1, 2016
- Female Draft Provision Removed From National Defense Authorization Act - December 1, 2016
- Trump Taps Chao for Transportation, Mnuchin for Treasury and Ross for Commerce - November 30, 2016