In that case, the fact that the monogamous couple raising children happen to be of the same-sex becomes irrelevant.
If the person just doesn't care about what other people are doing, they are reckless and harm "traditional" marriage by diluting the altering it's meaning in the harts and minds of the people.
I think that if we opened up to a more caring family, regardless of who gives the caring, we'd find that a traditional family (Mommy and Daddy) isn't necessary for raising kids. There are plenty of different family makeups that yield productive members of society, and plenty of traditional families that turn our wackjobs.
On the other hand, the fact that other family structures do produce numerous success stories doesn't change the fact that being raised in a traditional two-parent home is the single largest factor in predicting a child's welfare and chances of future success as an adult.
In any case, I think we can pretty much amend your statement to read that homosexuals and heterosexuals both desire validation, recognition, and yes, the 'welfare of the family' out of marriage - not as any 'distant third', but as something right up there with every other reason that people get married. While i'm sure it varies from marriage to marriage, it's unfair to label the homosexual community as simply wanting mere validation from a marriage, because there is a whole host of things they desire from it. My friends want to get married and are talking about adopting a child eventually, and I think that's pretty cool. So it seems like 'welfare of the family' is right on up there to me.
Have a good 'un!
They don't, but I fail to see the relevance. Are you trying to claim that if the reasons are the same, the state should recognize gay marriage? That makes no sense.And how are any of these reasons impacted by the sexual orientation of the two people involved?
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow