So, I will admit I've only skimmed this thread as it has grown rather long since last I posted in it. But it seems to me that some people are objecting to gay marriage on the grounds that:
1. Non-biological parents are, on average, less loving of their children than biological parents, and
2. Allowing gay marriage causes a higher percentage of children to be raised by non-biological parents than disallowing it does.
Let's imagine, for the sake of argument
, that premise 1 is true. (I rather doubt it is, but then, I haven't really looked at any evidence.) Presumably then, you would only
be opposed to gay marriages between people who are incapable of having biological children together. Gay couples who are able and willing to reproduce should be allowed to get married, right?
Because such cases do, in fact, exist. Some people are transsexual; some people are intersex. Some gay couples can have biological children together.
Sure, it's not common, but it's a lot less uncommon that you'd think. (For one thing, it's the situation I'll be in if I marry a cissexual woman, presuming we're both fertile.)
Therefore, if the above two premises are your only objections to gay marriage, then you are not, it seems, against all
gay marriages, but only against most of them.
And once we're able to grow gametes from stem cells
and any two people can have biological children together, then presumably you won't be against any gay marriages, right?
Or am I misunderstanding something?