If you’re a collector of unusual civic observances, clear some space for a new one: “Natural Family Month,” freshly proposed by Ohio lawmakers. As covered in The Buckeye Flame, House Bill 262 would dub the stretch from Mother’s Day to Father’s Day a state-sanctioned celebration of a narrowly defined group—families led by “one biological born man, one biological born woman in a lifelong monogamous relationship with their biological and yes even adopted children.” The month is sponsored by Rep. Beth Lear and Rep. Josh Williams, with backing from 26 Republican cosponsors. Mark your calendars, but check your family structure first: not every household is included in the festivities.

Clubhouse Rules, Posted Boldly

If you’re not sure whether your family qualifies, the logic trail is fairly direct. As detailed by The Buckeye Flame, supporters of the bill point to the Natural Family Foundation (NFF), a self-described “idea” out of Westerville, as the model for the project. The NFF spells out the requirements: a family must be anchored by a “clear male leader”—father, grandfather, or perhaps even a male elder cousin—drawn from the family’s existing lineage. Siblings, aunts, or non-traditional guardians need not apply. NFF argues this is the “cornerstone of all society,” warning ominously that failing to heed their arrangement risks leading America down the path of “Rome and Greece and other former great civilizations.”

The Cincinnati Enquirer expands on this definition, noting that the NFF’s guidelines exclude single-parent households, LGBTQ+ couples, blended families, and homes not under a male’s command. The Enquirer also highlights the curious specificity about the leader’s gender and lineage: not just any male will do, but one straight from the family tree.

Data from the Enquirer makes the ramifications clear: in Ohio alone, around 254,000 households with children are headed by single women. For those families, there’s little room at the table for this kind of official recognition. The NFF suggests their absence is a recipe for “lawless society”—an assertion left as a dramatic warning rather than a substantiated claim.

Intentions, Erasure, and a Partridge in a Family Tree

So what’s the stated rationale behind the proposal? According to cleveland.com, Rep. Lear frames it as a response to decreasing marriage rates and a declining U.S. birth rate, which has dipped to a historic low of 1.7 children per woman—below the 2.1 considered necessary for population replacement, based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Lear’s statement: “At a time when marriage is trending downward and young couples are often choosing to remain childless, it’s important for the State of Ohio to make a statement that marriage and families are the cornerstone of civil society.” Cosponsor Williams echoes this in a press release, saying the measure is intended to highlight the link between family structure and long-term social stability.

But several critics question the logic. Rachel Coyle, programs director for Ohioans Against Extremism, told cleveland.com she finds the premise thin: “If this really is about declining birthrates, personally, I’d think affordable childcare, paid leave, healthcare and lower grocery costs would make people want to have kids…Maybe all they need is a new month with a new name.”

Those less amused by the bill see more than a poorly targeted solution; they see deliberate exclusion. Dwayne Steward, executive director of Equality Ohio, characterized HB 262 to The Buckeye Flame as “a calculated act of strategic erasure.” Steward explained, “It not only invalidates the existence of single parents and countless other caregivers, but it takes direct aim at LGBTQ+ families across our state.” He also tied the bill to a broader pattern across the U.S., describing it as “part of a national effort to police family structures and control birthing bodies, cloaked in the language of tradition but rooted in exclusion and control.” The timing—introduced just before Pride Month—has not gone unnoticed by LGBTQ+ advocates, who see it as a pointed move.

Densil Porteous, executive director of Stonewall Columbus, added to The Buckeye Flame that HB 262 is “a coded effort to undermine and invalidate families like his own,” and he emphasized, “families come in many forms. Families built by love, by connection, by intention—not limited by outdated or discriminatory definitions.” As previously noted by The Buckeye Flame, Stonewall’s Family Pride Network instead celebrates all families rooted in care, respect, and dignity.

Natural Family: Select Your Leader

The NFF’s requirements don’t just stop at excluding LGBTQ+ households and single-parent families. Their insistence on a “clear male leader (e.g. father, grandfather, uncle, male elder cousin)” defined by lineage, as highlighted in both The Buckeye Flame and the Cincinnati Enquirer, raises the bar for who counts as family. The group warns of societal decay in the absence of such a structure, but as The Buckeye Flame discovered, their leadership model also doesn’t quite address how to handle children needing safe homes—like those in the foster system. When pressed, NFF executive director James Harrison declined to say whether a child would be better off in a home with a same-sex couple than without any home, suggesting only that it could lead to “confusion” for children, and drawing an analogy more suited to Christmas morning than child welfare: finding out the truth about Santa Claus.

Celebrations, Observances, and Who’s Watching

Supporters argue that “Natural Family Month” is no different from events like Pride Month. The NFF’s James Harrison told The Buckeye Flame, “If you’re going to celebrate gay Pride, then we’re going to celebrate the natural family.” Yet the practical effect diverges sharply. As the Cincinnati Enquirer notes, while Pride Month explicitly affirms people long marginalized or erased, “Natural Family Month” by design leaves out a host of everyday Ohioans, branding many as less worthy of recognition.

Notably, as cleveland.com and The Buckeye Flame both point out, this proposal is nonbinding—there are no legal or financial mandates. Nevertheless, it sends a clear cultural signal about which families are worthy of celebration.

Who’s This For?

The patterns here are familiar and—depending on one’s vantage—either reassuringly traditional or conspicuously restrictive. The Enquirer points to the fact that recent Republican-led bills in Ohio have repeatedly targeted LGBTQ+ rights, including healthcare access and other cultural flashpoints. The sponsors of HB 262 have similarly supported bills limiting diversity programs, increasing scrutiny of drag performances, or restricting gender-affirming care.

As for whether families really need a commemorative month (or whether that will move the needle on marriage or birth rates), critics remain skeptical. As Coyle suggested to cleveland.com, and as evidenced by the sheer number of Ohio families who fall outside the proposed definition, solutions to social and demographic challenges may be a little more complicated than declaring a theme month and hoping for the best.

You have to wonder: what purpose is truly served by spelling out exactly which kinds of families deserve a state celebration? As the NFF themselves told The Buckeye Flame, they aren’t even an official organization—just an idea. Like many ideas about family from the past, this one leaves a lot of people standing politely in the hallway, waiting for an invitation that’s unlikely to arrive.

In the end, Ohio may get its Natural Family Month—a dedicated period, as defined by a handful of lawmakers and an “idea.” But for thousands of families across the state, the message is clear: some parties just aren’t meant for everyone. Is that really the best way to support the next generation?