Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
>
> At 07:26 2003-07-24 -0400, John D Giorgis posted a text containing the
> following:
> >Gay marriage would cut the final cord that ties marriage to the well-being
> >of children. It is a step we should not take. Our cultural forgetting of
> >the meaning of marriage has already had too many sad consequences for
> >children and adults (not least for their moral development).
>
> This is only true if being gay is considered immoral. If gays have the
> same moral values as the rest of the population, then they are as apt to
> be parents as the rest of the population. Although gays cannot reproduce,
Sure they can. Just not completely with their partners. But if
a gay couple felt a biological connection was important, they could do
things like have one partner have a child with a sibling of the other
partner's. The child has half their DNA in common with the first
partner, and one quarter in common with the other. (Not quite as
strong a connection as a child of a heterosexual couple, who has half
in common with both. But still good.)
---David
The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship
terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and
child are all "halves". Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece,
nephew, half-sibling, and so on are "quarters". And you know you're
really a redneck if you need fractions which aren't negative powers
of two!
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
