I really can't agree with this article. Sure, in the past, an unmarried mother was unthinkable, looked at with scorn, and punished by society that in many ways. But in today's society, marriage is not for the primary benefit of having children. Yes, the social stigma still exists, but in many places it's so slight that it almost makes no difference.
Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him.
Another point that I really can't agree with. After all, there are many children without parents, adopted and unadopted, who are also "denied their birthright". The majority are born to parents who didn't want them or couldn't keep them, the rest are orphans who will never get to meet their parents. Sure, some are adopted by loving parents, but there are many that spend their lives bounced around between orphanages and foster homes, never having a stable home and two loving parents.
Now, the difference I see between the two types of marriages with children, is that the homosexual couple has to go through steps to have kids. It's thought-planned, and (usually) both parents really want the kids. Heterosexual marriages (or non-marriages, as mentioned above) are not always so. There are parents who didn't want kids to begin with but stick with it, and later resent it. There are the parents who have "accidents" who love their kids, but aren't really prepared emotionally. Who can say that which upbringing is really better overall?
