Gay Marriage Child-Rearing Fallicies drive me CRAZY...

I keep reading lines like this from traditional marriage supporters:

"If gay marriage is allowed, the nation will soon begin to experience an increased degradation of the nuclear family -- resulting in fewer kids being raised by both a mom and a dad."

and

"What will the landscape of America look like if same-sex marriage is legalized across our nation? Social scientists report what most Americans have always known: Both boys and girls are deeply affected in biological and psychological ways by the presence of their fathers."

and

"If the American family loses the presence of the birth dad in the home, there will be huge consequences to the growth and stability of the next generation of children in that family."

Every time I read these arguments (like I did for these on CNN or a more fair approach here), a little logic alarm ding ding dings in my head.  There are SO many situations where a family does not have a familiar looking birth mother and a birth father and yet, these situations are not always treated with the same distaste as gay marriage:

  • What about interracial marriage? If the child comes out looking more dark-skinned, will they not be able to relate to their light-skinned parent?

  • One parent might die in a war, or die from cancer or illness, leaving a widow. Is a widow unable to properly rear a child?

  • Is a parent with a deformity not able to properly rear a child that might not have a deformity like themselves?

  • What about children in foster care? What are the comparisons of children taken care of by gay parents versus kids taken care of by a foster agency? Or kids not ever adopted their whole lives?

  • What about children who are reared by parents of different religions? Does this differing value system harm the children? Or possibly create a more tolerant child? Before you answer that, what if they have the same religion, but different political beliefs?

  • What about children who are reared by young parents? Or old parents? Or parents who are far apart in age?

  • Speaking of age, would you rather your children reared by two functioning alcoholic opposite sex teens who ran away from home and work for minimum wage and love to party, or two professional, interfaith church-going, committed, happy 35-year old gay men from Austin, TX who are committed to their children being well-educated, well taken care of, and having been through a rigorous adoption process to ensure the child's well-being?

I have at least one friend from every single bullet point and they are each their own unique person, not traumatized, belittled, unsocial, mentally unstable, or whatever else they'll have you believe happens.  We're a part of the human race.  We're born to be dynamic and to make bold choices and do unique things.  We're resilient by nature!  Stop laying eggs over gay marriage.  Your energy should be put toward something truly useful, like say providing water to all human beings or to international disaster relief funds.  Or, you can click here once per day for FREE and provide over one cup of food to those in need!

Also, when you use the argument to say that children are the result of marriage, your implication is that if gay marriage were legal and you therefore cannot have children through fornication, this therefore voids the purpose of marriage.

  • What about women who are barren and men who are sterile? Should they also be denied the right to marry?

  • Would you like to take a stand on Deaf families? Or blind families?

  • If a father is in a wheelchair, he run on a football field like a "normal father." Does that make him an unfit parent?

Listen, we're not creating a medicine to make everyone gay because then we'd be forced to procreate with women to have children (ew).  Instead, we appreciate heterosexuals and their contributions, marriages, relationships, etc.  We would simply love to be able to enjoy our lives as well.  As Mark Fiore said in 2004, here is our gay agenda.