Controversial bill in Massachusetts sparks debate over redefinition of traditional family structure

Controversial bill in Massachusetts sparks debate over redefinition of traditional family structure

Claims are circulating that the LGBT movement is seeking to redefine the traditional family structure following the enshrinement of same-sex “marriage” into law. A new, controversial 42-page bill that passed unanimously in the Massachusetts legislature appears to back up these claims. The bill, touted as a dramatic shift in the history of family law, aims to streamline and standardize the legal structures surrounding the families of same-sex couples.

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, who is openly lesbian, publicly supported the bill, which states that same-sex couples will no longer need to go through adoption proceedings for both partners to be the legal parents. The bill allows the same-sex couple to include changes to the biological mother and father on the baby's birth certificate. Other provisions include formalizing surrogacy agreements in family law and changing traditional family terms by changing “mother” and “father” to gender-neutral language.

Far from helping innocent children, these changes are designed to meet the personal needs of unusual adults. Such radical changes run the risk of objectifying children and harming their mental and emotional well-being. In addition, these changes could lead to a host of new legal problems.

GLAD, an LGBT organization, is said to have organized the lobbying behind the bill, and the text of the bill is believed to have been written by this group. Despite the controversy surrounding the bill, it received the full support of the Republican Party in the state, including the party leadership. There is growing criticism that the conservative party is becoming more lenient towards changes in traditional family values.

Still, the question remains whether this bill represents the next step in the LGBT movement's quest for normalcy and whether these discussions will lead to similar proposals in other states.