After receiving e-mails on my Elian column,
I decided to revisit the issue in an attempt to answer some of the
criticisms that have been leveled against those of us who oppose Elian’s
automatic return to Cuba.
Some have alleged that conservatives are so blinded by their hatred
for Bill Clinton that they are willing to ignore the sacred parental
rights they are so fond of championing. They say we are allowing
politics to interfere with our judgment about what is in the best
interests of the child.
First, let me reiterate my position. Janet Reno and the INS, despite
probably having the legal authority to send Elian back without even
considering what is in his best interests, ought not to do so. Instead,
they should follow their originally stated position of allowing the
family courts of Florida to make the determination.
Next, I must tell you that I did not arrive at my opinion
immediately, based on some knee-jerk reaction against communism, though
I have an unapologetic aversion to that godless system. I agonized over
this matter for some time before finalizing my opinion.
My initial thought was that Elian should be returned to his father. I
even wondered whether some of my fellow conservatives weren’t guilty of
forming their opinions too hastily, and without giving due consideration
to the father-child bond.
I place a very high value on parental rights and strongly resent
undue encroachments on those rights by any government, including our own
federal and state governments. I’ve been involved in cases where I was
appalled by the degree to which paternalistic government agencies sought
to impose their will on families, all in the name of doing what is in
the best interests of the children. Absent abuse and the like, parents
ought to be allowed to raise their children as they see fit.
As I studied this more deeply, it finally dawned on me that I was
viewing this through my lenses as a parent living in a free nation and
as a lawyer who used to handle child-custody cases in the state of
Missouri. This case is not quite that simple.
For me, this is not a political matter, in the sense of Republicans
against Democrats. My opinion has nothing to do with my feelings about
Bill Clinton. It has to do with what is in the best interests of this
child, giving due consideration to the father’s parental rights. But
here’s the catch: Those who keep clamoring for Juan Gonzalez’s parental
rights are in desperate need of a reality check. There are no parental
rights in Castro’s communist Cuba. Elian will be a ward of the state.
For those who love liberty and care about children, this is simply
unacceptable.
Unfortunately, liberals seem to have a pronounced learning disability
when it comes to recognizing the evils of communism. How can we expect
Bill Clinton to be concerned with Elian’s eventual plight in a communist
country? He has shown no respect for the spiritual foundation and
liberty that makes the United States the greatest nation in the history
of the world. Why, then, would he abhor a nation, such as Cuba, whose
government is bereft of both spirituality and freedom?
Castro is a committed Marxist. Marx was dedicated to the proposition
that the family unit must be abolished for the sake of the primacy of
the state. You don’t believe me? Then listen to what Marx himself had to
say about family and parental rights in his notorious Manifesto:
“Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare-up at this
infamous proposal of the Communists. On what foundation is the present
family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its
completely developed form, this family exists only among the
bourgeoisie. … The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course
when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of
capital. … The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education,
about the hallowed correlation of parents and child, becomes all the
more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the
family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children
transformed into simple articles of commerce and industry and labor.”
Do any of you still want to talk to me about Juan Gonzalez’s parental
rights?