CatholicVoteAction.org

Michael Kingsley thinks Antonin Scalia isn’t “normal” because he and his wife Maureen have nine children.

Kingsley is pushing back at those who say Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan might be a lesbian. But his argument shows us an amazing insight into the modern liberal mind:

Now that the sex lives of Supreme Court justices have become grist for commentators, we are finally free to discuss a question formerly only whispered about in the shadows: Why does Justice Antonin Scalia, by common consent the leading intellectual force on the Court, have nine children? Is this normal? Or should I say “normal,” as some people choose to define it? Can he represent the views of ordinary Americans when he practices such a minority lifestyle? After all, having nine children is far more unusual in this country than, say, being a lesbian.

Having large families of course was considered normal for centuries. But in a few quarters, more people would agree with Kingsley than they would agree with me. In fact, Kingsley’s question deserves to go on the next Gallup Poll. The results would be fascinating (and they might even be depressing.) The question is: Why would some Americans think having nine kids would be more abnormal than same-sex relations?

In the debate on same-sex ‘marriages,’ its supporters are quick to ask: “How is your marriage harmed if two gays get married?” (In fact, I saw this argument employed this morning in reaction to Souder’s infidelity.) And quite a few Americans feel allowing gays to get married wouldn’t adversely affect their marriage, so they go along with the idea. (Which is why gays use this argument. Of course, marriage is about raising the next generation not only your lifelong relationship.)

But many Americans do feel threatened when they see large families. Friends of mine who have six or more kids can recite chapter and verse of what rude and vulgar things people say to them about having a large family. “Are they all yours?” “Haven’t you heard of birth control?” And many other phrases that I can’t even repeat here. This ugly sneering rivals any of the antagonism received by gay couples.

So why would someone lash out at a large family when they wouldn’t even dream of ridiculing a gay couple? Because if you practice contraception and in general look at children more as a burden than a blessing, seeing a family with nine kids cross your path feels like an indictment of your decision. That gay couple hasn’t affected or harmed your marriage, but that large family has (at least it seems). Even if the parent of the large family is nothing but charming and friendly, the insults still pour in. If you have a large family, you need to have a thick skin. It’s a world upside down.

Here someone at the Huffington Post is campaigning against parents responsibly raising their children

“While Illinois has a mandatory parental involvement law on the books, it has long been enjoined. Thus, young women in Illinois who are capable of making their own abortion decision can do so with the guidance of their healthcare provider and other trusted adults. They are not forced to involve their parents where they do not feel safe doing so. However, the State is aggressively seeking to end that court protection for young women and to enforce the Illinois Parental Notification of Abortion Act. It is imperative to put an end to the threat of parental notification in Illinois, and to work to eliminate similar laws across the country. ”

**

What lunacy has got us to the point where parents are required to sign off on children receiving Tylenol, but prohibited from notification in case of abortion? How can children not old enough to drive be “capable of making their own abortion decision”?

This past Christmas (is it really over???), I heard that WalMart was planning to join the ranks of other stores in discontinuing sales of toy weapons. No more bow/arrows, plastic swords, or cap guns, since these plastic playthings obviously are responsible for lots of crime. Apparently the Nerf dart guns are still ok.

Sally Thomas at FirstThings writes on The Killer Instinct | First Things: “As it happens, in my family, with boys in the house, we do buy war toys—not nuclear missiles, of course, just the normal assortment of blasters and cork shooters and swords of various kinds, including an actual antique Indian scimitar in a moth-eaten velvet scabbard, which was the one thing our eleven-year-old wanted for his birthday.”

She proceeds to quote Anne Roche Muggeridge who wrote: “…prevailing society now thoroughly regards young men as social invalids. . . . The fashion in education for the past three decades has been to try to make boys more like girls: to forbid them their toy guns and rough play, to engage them in exercises of cooperation and sharing, to involve them in dolls and courses in the domestic arts, to denounce any boyish roughness as “aggressive” and “sexist.”

If I wasn’t running CatholicVote, I would consider building a new business for American boys. Hey, maybe even call it American Boy (after the mother-affirming, yet money guzzling successful American Girl merchandise model). If what Sally writes is true, namely that boys by nature like to ’shoot, slash, and stab’ for fun, then perhaps a real market need is not being met. The store could sell toy guns of every type, swords, armor, or even a cowboy set. Instead of tea-party with your dolls, how about a kid-sized castle to play on. Or a saloon for an old fashioned cowboy shootout, complete with bar stools and root beer. Am I crazy? Hopelessly politically incorrect?

Mark my words, somebody is going to take advantage of this market opportunity.