Think tank touts 'natural' family

Published: Sunday, Jan. 29, 2006 11:28 p.m. MST
E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
The Sutherland Institute envisions "a landscape of family homes, lawns, and gardens busy with useful tasks and ringing with the laughter of many children."

It's a vision the conservative-issues group sent last fall to 232 of Utah's city councils and the governing units of every county, said Paul Mero, institute president.

So far, Mero is aware of only one city that has embraced the resolution. The Kanab City Council voted earlier this month to adopt the "Resolution on The Natural Family: A vision for Utah."

The resolution states the "natural family is the fundamental unit of society" and encourages women to be "wives, homemakers and mothers," and men to be "husbands, homebuilders and fathers." It is leading up to a March 29 Utah regional meeting of the World Congress of Families, he said.

Before the vote, Kanab Mayor Kim Lawson compared his community and nation to a ship on the ocean.

"There are large waves coming towards us . . . the most serious of which (in my opinion) is denigration of the natural family as the fundamental unit of society," he told council members.

However, other city councils haven't adopted the message. North Salt Lake's City Council voted not to adopt the resolution last November, and Mero understands it was discussed by West Valley City and Mapleton officials, but no action was taken.

Story continues below
Mapleton City Council Member Jim Brady recalled that the resolution felt "exclusive," and didn't seem to take into account single-parent families, foster families or adoptive families. It also talked about the role of the father as the money-earner, and the mother in the home.

"Many of us probably agreed with it, but didn't feel it was appropriate to dictate those roles within the family unit," he said.

Mero, however, said he's not disappointed that the resolution isn't more widely accepted.

"We're not in the business of punching people around politically," Mero said. "We just wanted to give them the opportunity to discuss new ideas, or old ideas in a new way."

Quin Monson, assistant director for the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University, said he's not surprised that most cities haven't considered the Sutherland resolution.

"A resolution supporting the family is laudable, but it doesn't really do anything," he said. City councils' key concerns are issues like "balancing the budget, making sure the streets are plowed," he said.

There is also the potential of divisiveness, even in communities where a majority of people agree with the resolution, Monson said.

"It may be that there are people who aren't in the ideal family situation, not by any choice of their own. If you are a city council member, why would you want to poke those folks in the eye?"

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.