Reply #27: #3 [View All]

[intheflow]

:puke: There are more things wrong with this than what you cite.

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother
It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.

Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.

1) "A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father."

WRONG! I know many gay couples who have natural children, since many people come to realize they're gay (or bi) later in life, after they've been married or in straight relationships that have resulted in a child. Most of those kids still have contact with both biological parents, certainly at the same rate as the divorced-and-remaining-hetero couples' rate of duel biological parent involvement.


2) "He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him."

WRONG! If this is the definition of parenting, I guess we ought to cancel all adoptions, foster home placements, and second marriages for heterosexuals. Obviously any child will be tainted if exposed to living with someone outside their pure bloodline. (But perhaps these conservatives are inbred so as to not pollute their own bloodlines.:eyes:)


3) "He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model."

WRONG! This statement assumes that gay couples live in some kind of "gay bubble" where their children are never exposed to straight role models. Of course since these bigots probably shun their own family members who are gay, they are completely devoid of conceptualizing that many families still love and embrace their gay relatives, and so children of gay parents are exposed to "traditional" families, most of which have at least member who is either a man or a woman. Certainly that person could also be a reliable influence on the child's development.


Of course the whole rest of those points are pure crap, and you do an excellent job debunking them. But the other cognitive dissonances of #3 that you didn't mention really jumped out at me.