Having come across the topic in various contexts lately, the subject of "family" has left me with more questions than answers.
In part, what drives this is the constant use (or mis-use) of the term "family" by groups like Focus on the Family, American Family Association, and the Family Research Council (among others). Their efforts are focused on promoting "family" values and "family friendly" policiesall within the context of biblical definitions of "family" and "marriage." It's gotten to the point that I instinctively loathe or gravitate away from anything labeled as "family friendly" or directed at the family in any way.
I've tried to rationalize the arguments of these groups, to put them into the same light as reality. Moreover, I've tried to put them into the full context of the ideals upon which the U.S. Constitution was written and upon which this country was founded. But the other day, as I was thinking about this for the umpteenth time, I finally reached the limit.
What family are these folks talking about? Seriously.
Upon which version of "family" are these groups focusing?
What criteria are they using to define "family"?
Is familial status conferred/affirmed, or is it declared/adopted?
Is there a mechanism or standard against which the bonds of association can be measured?
Yes, I understand that "family focus" is little more than a ruse of social and religious conservatives to cast the world in their image. But when these efforts bleed into how our law is constructed, construed, and adopted, then we have to set some standards on the language, provide definitions, and establishat a minimuma framework that constitutes much, much more than just who may and may not marry.
Families come together and break apart; hate each other and love each other; siblings, parents, spouses, and relatives can be close, distant, or any point in between; people get married, separated, divorced, live together, live apart, are gay, estranged, adopted, and abandoned, people seek companionship, or seek solitude. People change towns, phone numbers, friends, jobs, partners, religions, hobbies, appearance, and even their sex. The idea that a family must exist in a singular, trite, idealized definition while forsaking all other familial circumstances (or a subset, thereof) is utterly absurd and offensive to those who don't exist within that narrow construct.
Prescriptions for the courses a human life may take are completely devoid of rationality and damage those who don't abide by those prescriptions. It offends both our legal notion of individual rights and liberty, as well as the greater context of the American ideal of self-determination where we are each the sovereign ruler of our intellect and our direction. The Founding Fathers understood that, the fundamental element of all liberty was the liberty of individuals to determine for themselves the course their lives would take.
We choose the profession in which we work, it is not prescribed or dictated to us. We choose the person with whom we want to be intimate and spend our lives, that person is not prescribed or dictated to us. We choose which hobbies and interests to which we will devote our energies and intellect, they are not prescribed or dictated to us. We choose the car, house, and clothes that we want within our means, they are not prescribed or dictated to us. We travel where and when we choose, our destination and means of transportation are not prescribed or dictated to us. We read books and learn about the universe as we are inclined, not as is prescribed or dictated to us.
We do not require the approval of anyone in order to fashion the life we choose for ourselves. It is not necessary that we receive a legal imprimatur to engage in any of the activities or choices we make in our lives. And I emphasize the legal imprimatur component because absent the requirement of a legal imprimatur, the motivation is irrelevantwe are free to choose who we love and with whom we will join our lives, therefore, the issue of whether or not our sexual partner is a "choice" is irrelevant to a discussion about its legality.
Families may be the building block of social organization, but the term "family" must be construed in the broadest sense of the term. The term "family" must include all families, regardless of the permutation they may take.
The goal of family oriented policies cannot be to penalize those who do not conform to some secret, undeclared definition, while advantaging those who do conform. To enact policies which ostensibly protect families, yet, by operation, exclude many families that do not fit into narrow definitions, offends the basic premise of individual liberty and providing for the "general welfare," "equal protection," and our society's admonition to provide "justice for all." The goal of our public policy must be to enable ALL of our familial relationships to succeed within this society.