Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NCB
Because it goes from one man, one woman to two men or two women or three or four, or whatever.
|
So that's what you mean by "turn upside down the very building block of our society"?
That's an odd way to phrase it, considering that your scenario doesn't mention anything about "the very building block of our society" - which I assume is procreative heterosexual marriage - being turned upside down. Seems that people who want to participate in that building block would still be able to. And the people who don't... well, they already don't have to.
Is it fair to say that, by "turned upside down", you mean "broadened with more options for only those who want them"? Or am I missing something?
Quote:
|
Fact is, children thrive better in a true father and mother enviroment than a two man enviroment with one top and one bottom, each putting on their faux feminity and masculinity. Of course you can tell me some story on how your sister in laws friend is raising a kid with her partner and theyre doing well, but thats just ancedotal evidence. As a general rule it absolutely holds.
|
"As a
general rule it
absolutely holds?" Heh...I don't see how that sentence is logically possible. But nevermind that...
Source for this fact?
And assuming you provide a source... Reason for denying children same-sex parents simply because they're not optimal?