Are You In A Natural Family Or Not?

Living at ground zero of the conservative cultural and political life in our country, Utah, is interesting. In a story last week on the Conservative movement in our local alternative press, the City Weekly, was a reference to the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society – a conservative think tank and its definition of a “natural family.” The Howard Center’s statement on a natural family is this:
The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of: the continuation of the human species, the rearing of children, the regulation of sexuality, the provision of mutual support and protection, the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and the maintenance of bonds between the generations.
Our use of the term "natural family" is significant in many respects.
First, the term signifies a natural order to family structures that is common across cultures, historical, and overwhelmingly self-evident.
Second, the term signifies a wholly defensible expression. "Natural" is not "nuclear," which would limit its scope, nor is it "traditional," which would burden its utility in public discourse. It is what it is, a totally self-evident expression.
Third, the term "natural" precludes incompatible constructs of the family as well as incompatible behaviors among its members.
Fourth, the "natural family" is a positive expression. It does not require a discussion of negative incompatibilities to define itself.
This proclamation raises some questions for me:
1) It suggests that this understanding of the structure of the family has some ancient tradition, dating back to the origins of the human race. Is this true? Is this proposition defensible?
2) It states that a natural family is a lifelong commitment. What does this mean for those who have been divorced and then remarried?
3) It suggests that a natural family is defined by the procreation of the human race. What does this mean for couples who cannot have children?
4) If a family does not meet all of these characteristics, does that mean it is an “unnatural family?” If so, what are the ramifications of this?

What do you think?