First sentence is demonstrably incorrect. I don't have an opinion on her pregnancy, per se, because a) I'm not Mary Cheney; b) Her personal decisions do not affect me; c) I'm not gay.

However, it seems a rather centrist position to take that to deprive a child, who did not consent to such arrangement in any way, from having any kind of father from the very time of conception -- well, maybe that might turn out to not be such a swell idea. Or, perhaps people thinking of doing the same thing, should re-think it a few times over.

Or perhaps the most moderate position to take of all: By blood as well as by occupation, Ms. Cheney probably enjoys more financial solvency than others who might consider following her lead? And maybe this is solid ground for re-thinking the move yet again?

To sum it up concisely, maybe having a Dad is a GOOD thing. Just sometimes. Maybe?

Sorry, I understand I'm supposed to read something hate-filled into that. Having a little trouble getting it.

In response to the article:

I personally was raised by two women. I also consider myself manly, there is nothing that I had trouble learning as a kid that my two moms could not teach me. Yes, I managed to learn to pee standing up, I fuck great, I play sports, eat my steak, what more can I learn to be more “manly”?

I see no problem being raised by two women, just because I had no father does not mean that I had no male influence in my life whatsoever. I managed to turn out a fine upstanding man and personally find this article very offensive.

What really angers me is that Time would publish this article, without a contrasting viewpoint along side it.

question: does this james dobson have anything to do with Dobson Communications (a.k.a. CellularOne ?) If he does, I need to cancel my cell phone service a.s.a.p. !

thanks,

bill12498@yahoo.com