Yes, I get that but even if it were proven that being married made you more likely to create a stable, secure reproductive environment for offspring, why would this only be the case for the offspring of heterosexuals? https://twitter.com/DoctorHeadcrab/status/980923694984892418 …
It depends very much on the parents. The absolute best case scenario would be being raised by good parents who gave birth to you and probably grandparents, aunts and uncles as well.
-
-
Absolutely. There is a hierarchy of quality. And having a mentally ill, addicted, and criminal single parent falls somewhere near the bottom, below most adoptive or gay parents. The point is that there is a better and worse and it starts out with structural liabilities.
-
I'm sorry. I dont know how this is relevant unless you think people are taking kids away from their good biological parents and giving them to same sex couples.
-
It become relevant when an adoption or foster agency has the choice of placing a child in a heterosexual married, heterosexual unmarried, same sex, single, etc. home. Should the agency show preferences and for what?
-
It’s also relevant to those so hostile to homosexuality they might want to take children away from a biological homosexual parent. What makes for a better environment for the child?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.