SAME-SEX PARENTING: Mike Pignatello replies to Elizabeth Marquardt

I appreciate and share Elizabeth's concern for children. Yet it's apparent from her argument that none of her points are specific to same sex marriage. Her issue seems to be primarily with the divorce culture, reproductive technologies, and how these things have produced families with only one biological parent. These are corollary and important issues, but are not determinative of the civil rights question at hand. We can debate those points until the cows come home. The issue at hand is this:

When same sex couples can already legally raise families, why do the children of same sex couples not deserve the same legal protections through their parents that are afforded the children of opposite sex couples?

I think it's useful to frame the debate in terms of what is gained or lost for the people who want to obtain this basic right. We cannot ignore the lie that simply disallowing SSM will somehow prevent same sex couples from producing their own children. This cannot be the focus of the debate. Gays and lesbians have as much right to raise children as any heterosexual, and, in most states, are free to act on this right.

To change the debate about how same-sex marriages are not good for children is to talk about repealing the basic (human) right of individuals to bear and raise children, not to discuss the merits or drawbacks of SSM. This is quite off course.
posted by Eve at 1:28 AM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home