It Will Soon Be Non-Gestating Parent Day, Yeah

If one is not familiar with the headline celebration, it is — for most folks, especially the sane ones — Fathers’ Day. As a father (the best job in the world), this commentator will be celebrating Fathers’ Day by that precise designation.

It may be because this writer is a conservative Republican. It is the left-wing Democrats that find the word “father” to be offensive. And if one is wondering, they feel the same about the word “mother” — unless, of course, if it is used as half of a compound word.

Those who embrace the science-bending and commonsense-challenged woke political correctness and identity politics of the neo-left believe “father” and “mother” should be banned from the lexicon in government documents (for starters) — and they are using their political power to do just that.

This movement is not composed of a few nutcases on the radical left of the Democratic Party — lonely voices in the political wilderness residing on ragged sofas in dank basements. One has seen political absurdity become the mainstay philosophy of the increasingly radical Democratic Party. (Did men compete in women’s sports just pop into your mind? But that is for another day.)

Since — according to polls — most Democrat voters overwhelmingly reject the gender lunacy of their own party leaders, one can only wonder why they keep electing the nutcases. Or why Democrat leaders keep pursuing such unpopular policies.

We see the latest example in New York, where Democrats in the state legislature just passed legislation that would abolish the use of the words “mother” and “father” from key sections of state documents. The new terms are “gestating parent” and “non-gestating parent” — and “paternity” becomes “parentage.” A “putative father” would be redesignated as an “alleged parent.” (What the hell is an “alleged parent?)

As of this writing, the bill is on the desk of Governor Kathy Hochul, who claims to be unaware of the legislation — and will take it under consideration. She said she does not comment on “pending legislation.” Oh really? Governors introduce legislation. They lobby for or against legislation. Commenting on legislation is a 1-0-1 function of a governor.

At some point, Hochul is going to have to come out from behind the nonsense and deal with the legislation. Will she side with common sense or go with the crazies in her party? Stay tuned.

What boggles the mind is the “why” question. Why would Democrats propose and vote for such an unnecessary, absurd, and confusing change? Proponents of the legislation claim that it will promote “inclusivity.” So, how does that work?

Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, one of the key sponsors, gave this explanation: “The Office of Court Administration asked for this bill to modernize the law to respect all families in whatever form they take.”

That is an explanation that explains nothing. One guesses that if an action is stupid, the rationale will also be stupid.

Senator Luis Sepulveda, who introduced the State Senate version, said it will provide “consistency” — suggesting that the proposed law “aligns with existing statutes with evolving case law on assisted reproduction and surrogacy.”

Only a politician could come up with that head-scratcher. Sepulveda did something totally inexplicable. So, why should one expect a rational explanation when one does not exist?

The left-wing and the bureaucracy (but one repeats oneself) love to create ridiculous euphemisms. Think “collateral damage” for dead civilians in war. Or “involuntary separation” for being fired. Or “extraordinary rendition” for kidnapping a person in a foreign country, such as Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro.

Most bureaucratese is confined to intra-government communications. Woke Democrats, however, inject their new terminology into the common culture — and impose it by edict. They then use shame to force compliance. One sees this on steroids in the preposterous pronoun proliferation.

Eliminating the simple words “mother” and “father” is not limited to looney left-wing chatter by back-benchers. The New York legislature actually passed legislation targeting two of the most basic words of humanity.

In terms of the language, this is another example of the adage, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The words “mother” and “father” work perfectly. They fit every occasion. The male parent — whether biological or not — is the father. The female parent — whether biological or not — is the mother. That broadly applies to all parents in all manner of relationships— and to Catholic priests.

And what about those who consider themselves the opposite sex, or no gender at all? With the exception of transgenders who have had the surgery, let them live in their fantasy world as a matter of personal freedom. But the entire culture does not have to transform to accommodate the unique desires of a minuscule proportion of the population.

Traditional families with traditional men and women raising boys and girls — still the overwhelming majority — must now navigate state paperwork that reduces motherhood to a temporary physiological process and fatherhood to its absence. Critics rightly note this does nothing to expand actual family formations — which is a problem in America today. Rather, it erodes cultural norms, potentially complicating custody disputes, birth certificates, and child-rearing acknowledgments while signaling that government prefers ideological conformity over biological truth.

By stripping away words rooted in millennia of human experience — words that distinguish the unique roles of childbearing mothers and providing fathers — the law supposedly elevates non-traditional family structures. A same-sex couple using surrogacy, or a single individual employing assisted reproduction, will now encounter language that treats all parental contributions as interchangeable “gestational” functions rather than distinct maternal or paternal bonds. This, they claim, validates diverse identities by pretending biological sex and traditional parenthood are outdated constructs unworthy of legal recognition.

This is not progress toward diversity. It is the enforced homogenization of language to appease a radical base within the Democratic Party — a base that wields power and influence far beyond its numbers.

One could stop there and have a solid commentary on the sheer ridiculousness of this particular piece of woke legislation. But why stop when the Democrats provide such a target-rich environment of absurd political correctness?

Consider the broader assault on reality. Democrats have pushed “birthing persons” in place of mothers in federal documents. They have championed “chest feeding” instead of breastfeeding. Schools under their influence have instructed teachers to use “person who gave birth” or other clinical nonsense. One has seen efforts in various states to replace “mother” with “inseminated person” or similar atrocities.

Then there are the pronoun wars. One must now navigate a minefield of “they/them,” “ze/zir,” and whatever new invention the activists conjure up this week — accusing ono-complaints with bigotry. Government agencies, corporations, and universities bow to this linguistic tyranny, all in the name of “inclusion” — that actually excludes the vast majority who simply speak and understand plain English.

This is the pattern of the modern left. Take something that works perfectly well — language developed over centuries to describe biological and social realities — and replace it with clunky, ideological jargon that no normal person uses in everyday conversation.

The irony is thick. Democrats who once positioned themselves as champions of the working class now prioritize symbolic language changes over the real problems facing families — inflation, crime, failing schools, open borders, and economic pressures that make raising children difficult enough without government paperwork turning “Mom” and “Dad” into technocratic insults.

Governor Hochul has until the end of the year to act on this bill. New Yorkers — and Americans watching this spectacle — deserve to know where she stands. Will she veto this nonsense and stand with common sense? Or will she sign it and further alienate the very families she claims to champion?

One suspects the radicals will prevail unless there is significant pushback. But pushbacks are coming. The American people, across the political spectrum, are growing weary of this cultural overreach. They know that mothers and fathers are not interchangeable clinical functions. They know that erasing words does not erase reality.

As Fathers’ Day approaches, one will celebrate it unapologetically — as will millions of others. No amount of Democratic legislation can change the love, responsibility, and unique role of a father. Or a mother, whose day we celebrated in May. The words have served humanity well for thousands of years. They will continue to do so long after this latest woke folly fades into the dustbin of absurd history.

So, there ‘tis