n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 1 I am one of six adult children of gay parents who recently filed amicus
briefs with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to respect the authority
of citizens to keep the original definition of marriage: a union between one
man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, so that children may know
and may be raised by their biological parents. I also live in Canada, where
same-sex marriage was federally mandated in 2005.
I am the daughter of a gay father who died of AIDS. I described my
experiences in my book: Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting.
Over fifty adult children who were raised by LGBT parents have communicated
with me and share my concerns about same-sex marriage and parenting. Many of
us struggle with our own sexuality and sense of gender because of the
influences in our household environments growing up.
We have great compassion for people who struggle with their sexuality and
gender identity—not animosity. And we love our parents. Yet, when we go
public with our stories, we often face ostracism, silencing, and threats.
I want to warn America to expect severe erosion of First Amendment freedoms
if the US Supreme Court mandates same-sex marriage. The consequences have
played out in Canada for ten years now, and they are truly Orwellian in
nature and scope.
Canada’s Lessons
In Canada, freedoms of speech, press, religion, and association have
suffered greatly due to government pressure. The debate over same-sex
marriage that is taking place in the United States could not legally exist
in Canada today. Because of legal restrictions on speech, if you say or
write anything considered “homophobic” (including, by definition, anything
questioning same-sex marriage), you could face discipline, termination of
employment, or prosecution by the government.
Why do police prosecute speech under the guise of eliminating “hate speech
” when there are existing legal remedies and criminal protections against
slander, defamation, threats, and assault that equally apply to all
Americans? Hate-crime-like policies using the terms “sexual orientation”
and “gender identity” create unequal protections in law, whereby protected
groups receive more legal protection than other groups.
Having witnessed how mob hysteria in Indiana caused the legislature to back-
track on a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, many Americans are beginning
to understand that some activists on the Left want to usher in state control
over every institution and freedom. In this scheme, personal autonomy and
freedom of expression become nothing more than pipe dreams, and children
become commodified.
Children are not commodities that can be justifiably severed from their
natural parentage and traded between unrelated adults. Children in same-sex
households will often deny their grief and pretend they don’t miss a
biological parent, feeling pressured to speak positively due to the politics
surrounding LGBT households. However, when children lose either of their
biological parents because of death, divorce, adoption, or artificial
reproductive technology, they experience a painful void. It is the same for
us when our gay parent brings his or her same-sex partner(s) into our lives.
Their partner(s) can never replace our missing biological parent.
The State as Ultimate Arbiter of Parenthood
Over and over, we are told that “permitting same-sex couples access to the
designation of marriage will not deprive anyone of any rights.” That is a
lie.
When same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada in 2005, parenting was
immediately redefined. Canada’s gay marriage law, Bill C-38, included a
provision to erase the term “natural parent” and replace it across the
board with gender-neutral “legal parent” in federal law. Now all children
only have “legal parents,” as defined by the state. By legally erasing
biological parenthood in this way, the state ignores children’s foremost
right: their immutable, intrinsic yearning to know and be raised by their
own biological parents.
Mothers and fathers bring unique and complementary gifts to their children.
Contrary to the logic of same-sex marriage, the gender of parents matters
for the healthy development of children. We know, for example, that the
majority of incarcerated men did not have their fathers in the home. Fathers
by their nature secure identity, instill direction, provide discipline,
boundaries, and risk-taking adventures, and set lifelong examples for
children. But fathers cannot nurture children in the womb or give birth to
and breast-feed babies. Mothers nurture children in unique and beneficial
ways that cannot be duplicated by fathers.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that men and women are
anatomically, biologically, physiologically, psychologically, hormonally,
and neurologically different from each other. These unique differences
provide lifelong benefits to children that cannot be duplicated by same-
gender “legal” parents acting out different gender roles or attempting to
substitute for the missing male or female role model in the home.
In effect, same-sex marriage not only deprives children of their own rights
to natural parentage, it gives the state the power to override the autonomy
of biological parents, which means parental rights are usurped by the
government.
Hate Tribunals Are Coming
In Canada, it is considered discriminatory to say that marriage is between a
man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his or her
biological married parents. It is not just politically incorrect in Canada
to say so; you can be saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal
fees, fined, and forced to take sensitivity training.
Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a
complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these
organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed
in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified
under “sexual orientation.” It takes only one complaint against a person
to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands
of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private
residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking
for hate speech.
The plaintiff making the complaint has his legal fees completely paid for by
the government. Not so the defendant. Even if the defendant is found
innocent, he cannot recover his legal costs. If he is found guilty, he must
pay fines to the person(s) who brought forth the complaint.
If your beliefs, values, and political opinions are different from the state
’s, you risk losing your professional license, job, or business, and even
your children. Look no further than the Lev Tahor Sect, an Orthodox Jewish
sect. Many members, who had been involved in a bitter custody battle with
child protection services, began leaving Chatham, Ontario, for Guatemala in
March 2014, to escape prosecution for their religious faith, which
conflicted with the Province’s guidelines for religious education. Of the
two hundred sect members, only half a dozen families remain in Chatham.
Parents can expect state interference when it comes to moral values,
parenting, and education—and not just in school. The state has access into
your home to supervise you as the parent, to judge your suitability. And if
the state doesn’t like what you are teaching your children, the state will
attempt to remove them from your home.
Teachers cannot make comments in their social networks, write letters to
editors, publicly debate, or vote according to their own conscience on their
own time. They can be disciplined or lose any chance of tenure. They can be
required at a bureaucrat’s whim to take re-education classes or
sensitivity training, or be fired for thinking politically incorrect
thoughts.
When same-sex marriage was created in Canada, gender-neutral language became
legally mandated. Newspeak proclaims that it is discriminatory to assume a
human being is male or female, or heterosexual. So, to be inclusive, special
non-gender-specific language is being used in media, government, workplaces
, and especially schools to avoid appearing ignorant, homophobic, or
discriminatory. A special curriculum is being used in many schools to teach
students how to use proper gender-neutral language. Unbeknownst to many
parents, use of gender terms to describe husband and wife, father and mother
, Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, and “he” and “she” is being steadily
eradicated in Canadian schools.
Which Is More Important: Sexual Autonomy or the First Amendment?
Recently, an American professor who was anonymously interviewed for the
American Conservative questioned whether sexual autonomy is going to cost
you your freedoms: “We are now at the point, he said, at which it is
legitimate to ask if sexual autonomy is more important than the First
Amendment?”
Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian citizens were
supposed to have been guaranteed: (1) freedom of conscience and religion; (2
) freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of
the press and other media of communication; (3) freedom of peaceful assembly
; and (4) freedom of association. In reality, all of these freedoms have
been curtailed with the legalization of same-sex marriage.
Wedding planners, rental halls, bed and breakfast owners, florists,
photographers, and bakers have already seen their freedoms eroded,
conscience rights ignored, and religious freedoms trampled in Canada. But
this is not just about the wedding industry. Anybody who owns a business may
not legally permit his or her conscience to inform business practices or
decisions if those decisions are not in line with the tribunals’ decisions
and the government’s sexual orientation and gender identity non-
discrimination laws. In the end, this means that the state basically
dictates whether and how citizens may express themselves.
Freedom to assemble and speak freely about man-woman marriage, family, and
sexuality is now restricted. Most faith communities have become “
politically correct” to avoid fines and loss of charitable status. Canadian
media are restricted by the Canadian Radio, Television, and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), which is similar to the FCC. If the
media air anything considered discriminatory, broadcasting licenses can be
revoked, and “human rights bodies” can charge fines and restrict future
airings.
An example of legally curtailed speech regarding homosexuality in Canada
involves the case of Bill Whatcott, who was arrested for hate speech in
April 2014 after distributing pamphlets that were critical of homosexuality.
Whether or not you agree with what he says, you should be aghast at this
state-sanctioned gagging. Books, DVDs, and other materials can also be
confiscated at the Canadian border if the materials are deemed “hateful.”
Americans need to prepare for the same sort of surveillance-society in
America if the Supreme Court rules to ban marriage as a male-female
institution. It means that no matter what you believe, the government will
be free to regulate your speech, your writing, your associations, and
whether or not you may express your conscience. Americans also need to
understand that the endgame for some in the LGBT rights movement involves
centralized state power—and the end of First Amendment freedoms.
Dawn Stefanowicz is an internationally recognized speaker and author. She is
a member of the Testimonial Committee of the International Children’s
Rights Institute. Her book, Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual
Parenting, is available at http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org. Dawn, a full-time licensed accountant, is married and has two teenaged children.
Print Friendly | n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 2 原文很长， 我总结一些内容。
原文作者是同性恋的孩子（不知道是收养的，还是IVF出来的）。 一个父亲死于AIDS.
作者从小STRUGGLE WITH our own sexuality and sense of gender。 同时，认识超过
50个被同性COUPLE 抚养大的孩子，有同样的问题。 这个作者认为这种ＳＴＲＵＧＧＬ
Ｅ 是家庭造成的。
这些被同性ＣＯＵＰＬＥ 抚养长大的孩子，不能表达自己生父或者生母的感情和不能
见到他们的遗憾。
在加拿大，如果任何人表示婚姻应该是男女之间的，就会面临巨额法律诉讼。 父母在
家里教育孩子也必须政治正确，否则孩子可能会被政府带走。而是，只有一个ＣＯＭＰ
ＬＡＩＮＴ，就会有没完没了地调查和诉讼。
总之，因为同性婚姻合法，言论自由和宗教自由以及父母教育自己孩子的自由受到极大
的影响。
authority
one
know
where
.
communicated
of
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: I am one of six adult children of gay parents who recently filed amicus
: briefs with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to respect the authority
: of citizens to keep the original definition of marriage: a union between one
: man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, so that children may know
: and may be raised by their biological parents. I also live in Canada, where
: same-sex marriage was federally mandated in 2005.
: I am the daughter of a gay father who died of AIDS. I described my
: experiences in my book: Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting.
: Over fifty adult children who were raised by LGBT parents have communicated
: with me and share my concerns about same-sex marriage and parenting. Many of
| m**n
发帖数: 9010 | 3 "在加拿大，如果任何人表示婚姻应该是男女之间的，就会面临巨额法律诉讼。"
不管这个是不是事实, 这与同性婚姻是否合法, 毫无关系.
你这话:
"因为同性婚姻合法，言论自由和宗教自由以及父母教育自己孩子的自由受到极大
的影响"是在偷换概念而已.
.
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 原文很长， 我总结一些内容。
: 原文作者是同性恋的孩子（不知道是收养的，还是IVF出来的）。 一个父亲死于AIDS.
: 作者从小STRUGGLE WITH our own sexuality and sense of gender。 同时，认识超过
: 50个被同性COUPLE 抚养大的孩子，有同样的问题。 这个作者认为这种ＳＴＲＵＧＧＬ
: Ｅ 是家庭造成的。
: 这些被同性ＣＯＵＰＬＥ 抚养长大的孩子，不能表达自己生父或者生母的感情和不能
: 见到他们的遗憾。
: 在加拿大，如果任何人表示婚姻应该是男女之间的，就会面临巨额法律诉讼。 父母在
: 家里教育孩子也必须政治正确，否则孩子可能会被政府带走。而是，只有一个ＣＯＭＰ
: ＬＡＩＮＴ，就会有没完没了地调查和诉讼。
| k**n
发帖数: 6198 | 4 我觉得那些同性恋的大人要怎么自己过是他们/她们自己的事，但是选择要养孩子是很
自私的一件事情
.
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 原文很长， 我总结一些内容。
: 原文作者是同性恋的孩子（不知道是收养的，还是IVF出来的）。 一个父亲死于AIDS.
: 作者从小STRUGGLE WITH our own sexuality and sense of gender。 同时，认识超过
: 50个被同性COUPLE 抚养大的孩子，有同样的问题。 这个作者认为这种ＳＴＲＵＧＧＬ
: Ｅ 是家庭造成的。
: 这些被同性ＣＯＵＰＬＥ 抚养长大的孩子，不能表达自己生父或者生母的感情和不能
: 见到他们的遗憾。
: 在加拿大，如果任何人表示婚姻应该是男女之间的，就会面临巨额法律诉讼。 父母在
: 家里教育孩子也必须政治正确，否则孩子可能会被政府带走。而是，只有一个ＣＯＭＰ
: ＬＡＩＮＴ，就会有没完没了地调查和诉讼。
| w*********o
发帖数: 3030 | 5 Not necessarily true if the children were adopted. Anything would be better
than the child welfare system, anywhere, unless the parents are criminals.
And a lot of times, 养孩子 is a selfish thing, especially to Chinese parents
.
【在 k**n 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得那些同性恋的大人要怎么自己过是他们/她们自己的事，但是选择要养孩子是很
: 自私的一件事情
:
: .
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 6 你这是在搞笑吧。如果同性婚姻都不合法，人说婚姻应该是一男一女，有啥可诉讼的？
法律都是这末规定的。同性婚姻合法后，如果说婚姻是应该是一男一女之间的，按照Ｈ
ＡＴＥ ＣＲＩＭＥ 处理。
【在 m**n 的大作中提到】
: "在加拿大，如果任何人表示婚姻应该是男女之间的，就会面临巨额法律诉讼。"
: 不管这个是不是事实, 这与同性婚姻是否合法, 毫无关系.
: 你这话:
: "因为同性婚姻合法，言论自由和宗教自由以及父母教育自己孩子的自由受到极大
: 的影响"是在偷换概念而已.
:
: .
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 7 那篇文章的作者说，他自己对自己的性取向曾经感到非常困惑。我觉得，如果孩子的性
取向和性别认知与自己的父母不同，成长过程会很SUFFER。 同性恋占人口比例2%左右
，同性恋的孩子可能有98%的CHANCE 和他们性取向不同。 相反，异性夫妻孩子和家长
性取向的可能性要小很多。
文章中还提到一个问题，同性恋的孩子，不能表达对自己BIOLOGICAL PARENT 的渴望
， 必须表现成没有妈妈或者没有爸爸我也ＯＫ。
【在 k**n 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得那些同性恋的大人要怎么自己过是他们/她们自己的事，但是选择要养孩子是很
: 自私的一件事情
:
: .
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 8 被ＡＤＯＰＴＥＤ的孩子如果性取向和同性恋不同，会对孩子有何影响？ 英国一对女
同性恋，收养了一个男孩子，然后这个男孩子１１岁的时候就让男孩子变性。当然那个
孩子自己也说认为自己是女孩子。但是这到底是天生的，还是后天环境造成的，不得而
知。
better
parents
【在 w*********o 的大作中提到】
: Not necessarily true if the children were adopted. Anything would be better
: than the child welfare system, anywhere, unless the parents are criminals.
: And a lot of times, 养孩子 is a selfish thing, especially to Chinese parents
: .
| w*********o
发帖数: 3030 | 9 In that news article, the kid has a bigger brother who appears to be
straight.
Tran-sexual is different from gay, lesbian or bisexual.
I generally would be more suspicious about a gay couple trying to adopt
younger kids than a straight couple. The gay couple has more to prove.
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 被ＡＤＯＰＴＥＤ的孩子如果性取向和同性恋不同，会对孩子有何影响？ 英国一对女
: 同性恋，收养了一个男孩子，然后这个男孩子１１岁的时候就让男孩子变性。当然那个
: 孩子自己也说认为自己是女孩子。但是这到底是天生的，还是后天环境造成的，不得而
: 知。
:
: better
: parents
| t*******r
发帖数: 22634 | 10 我政治不正确地纯从 science 角度来讨论。。。两种可能都有。。。
基因的存在是先天。。。但一段基因能够被表达，后天因子也是很大
。。。
有很多人用 decay 点以后的例子，说明后天徒劳。。。但是问题在于
developmental critical period 很可能是在 decay 点以前，否则
也就不会有输在起跑线上这个说法。。。对于 LGBT 的例子，成人无法
改变不等于娃不会被影响。。。因为该成人，既有可能是基因决定，但也
不排除基因只是一半，另一半是输在起跑线上，所以就弯了。。。
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 被ＡＤＯＰＴＥＤ的孩子如果性取向和同性恋不同，会对孩子有何影响？ 英国一对女
: 同性恋，收养了一个男孩子，然后这个男孩子１１岁的时候就让男孩子变性。当然那个
: 孩子自己也说认为自己是女孩子。但是这到底是天生的，还是后天环境造成的，不得而
: 知。
:
: better
: parents
| | | n****y
发帖数: 6260 | 11 如果大家相信金溪报告（Kinsey reports）的话，那么大部分人对性伴侣的同性／异性
的要求是一个谱系，跟自闭症一样。两端是绝对的只对异性／同性有性趣，中间的就各
种比例都有。这个是纯粹生物方面的事情。
社会的要求对生物要求的体现有啥影响，那当然是巨大的了。不过当然还是越宽松的社
会流动性越大。
这个东西吧，亲子关系不好的家庭也不只是同志家庭。亲子关系好的家庭也不只是异性
家庭。非要拿框子去套是为什么呢？ | n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 12 同性恋之间不可能靠自然的方法生出孩子，是否应该抚养孩子？关系不好的异性家庭，
可以自己生出孩子，这个你拦不住啊。
【在 n****y 的大作中提到】
: 如果大家相信金溪报告（Kinsey reports）的话，那么大部分人对性伴侣的同性／异性
: 的要求是一个谱系，跟自闭症一样。两端是绝对的只对异性／同性有性趣，中间的就各
: 种比例都有。这个是纯粹生物方面的事情。
: 社会的要求对生物要求的体现有啥影响，那当然是巨大的了。不过当然还是越宽松的社
: 会流动性越大。
: 这个东西吧，亲子关系不好的家庭也不只是同志家庭。亲子关系好的家庭也不只是异性
: 家庭。非要拿框子去套是为什么呢？
| n****y
发帖数: 6260 | 13 呃，那不育的异性伴侣也不能自然的生出孩子来，是否应该抚养孩子？ | n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 14 异性伴侣孩子可能不是自己的，但是家庭结构和可能生出孩子的类似。
【在 n****y 的大作中提到】
: 呃，那不育的异性伴侣也不能自然的生出孩子来，是否应该抚养孩子？
| l*****r
发帖数: 7130 | 15 单亲呢？
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 异性伴侣孩子可能不是自己的，但是家庭结构和可能生出孩子的类似。
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 16 结构也是不类似的。但是人家自己生出来娃，你也拦不住。在美国，好像单亲收养孩子
比双亲的困难吧？至少一二十年前是这样的。
【在 l*****r 的大作中提到】
: 单亲呢？
| m**n
发帖数: 9010 | 17 同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？
如果真有这种巨额诉讼问题，
这事荒谬的，只是某些人非要把这类说法往hate crime上联系的做法，
而不是同性婚姻合法这个问题。
这就是我为什么说你在偷换概念。荒谬的明明是另外一件事，你说的好像
这状况说明同性婚姻合法荒谬似的。
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 你这是在搞笑吧。如果同性婚姻都不合法，人说婚姻应该是一男一女，有啥可诉讼的？
: 法律都是这末规定的。同性婚姻合法后，如果说婚姻是应该是一男一女之间的，按照Ｈ
: ＡＴＥ ＣＲＩＭＥ 处理。
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 18 那篇文章不是我写的。你找原文的作者去辩论。我没有任何说法，我只是转一篇文章，
让大家从一个同性恋家庭长大的孩子的角度去看这个问题。
【在 m**n 的大作中提到】
: 同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
: 就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？
: 如果真有这种巨额诉讼问题，
: 这事荒谬的，只是某些人非要把这类说法往hate crime上联系的做法，
: 而不是同性婚姻合法这个问题。
: 这就是我为什么说你在偷换概念。荒谬的明明是另外一件事，你说的好像
: 这状况说明同性婚姻合法荒谬似的。
| n********h
发帖数: 13135 | 19 “同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？“
我从来没有说过这样的话。我转的文章都是同性婚姻合法之后的现象。
【在 m**n 的大作中提到】
: 同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
: 就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？
: 如果真有这种巨额诉讼问题，
: 这事荒谬的，只是某些人非要把这类说法往hate crime上联系的做法，
: 而不是同性婚姻合法这个问题。
: 这就是我为什么说你在偷换概念。荒谬的明明是另外一件事，你说的好像
: 这状况说明同性婚姻合法荒谬似的。
| m**n
发帖数: 9010 | 20 那篇文章我根本没看。
我回应的是你的总结中表达的观点。
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: 那篇文章不是我写的。你找原文的作者去辩论。我没有任何说法，我只是转一篇文章，
: 让大家从一个同性恋家庭长大的孩子的角度去看这个问题。
| | | m**n
发帖数: 9010 | 21 您当然没说过这样的话，但您把同性婚姻合法化与您说其他那些荒谬事件
之间的因果关系进行了错误的引导。我做个类似的，错误的引导而已。
那些荒谬事件（如果真存在的话）的主因是什么，我想是很清楚的。
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: “同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
: 就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？“
: 我从来没有说过这样的话。我转的文章都是同性婚姻合法之后的现象。
| t*******r
发帖数: 22634 | 22 如果这个真的是加拿大法律所规定的，那么这个要么有法律条文，要么
有判例的 case # 。。。具体到把人关进去的法律，这玩意儿得有
reference 才能讨论。。。当然，大街上无差别扫射的那种显而易见
的 case 另说。。。
【在 m**n 的大作中提到】
: 同学，您的意思是不是同性婚姻不合法前，说婚姻可以是两男或两女之间的，
: 就可以面临巨额诉讼？因为那时法律是“那么”规定的？
: 如果真有这种巨额诉讼问题，
: 这事荒谬的，只是某些人非要把这类说法往hate crime上联系的做法，
: 而不是同性婚姻合法这个问题。
: 这就是我为什么说你在偷换概念。荒谬的明明是另外一件事，你说的好像
: 这状况说明同性婚姻合法荒谬似的。
| b*******r
发帖数: 1073 | 23 从社会学角度，这个立法也许有助于提高LGBT被社会接受的程度，从而有助于降低LGBT
的自杀率。(Suicide of Tyler Clementi at Rutgers University , 我们现在所在的
学区几年前也有学生因为性趋向而自杀）
从医学角度，不知道能否有助于降低HIV等疾病的感染率。
According to CDC http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/2012/hiv-infections-2007-2010.pdf
"male-to-male sex accounted for more than threefourths (78 percent) of new
HIV infections among men and nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of all new
infections in 2010 (29,800).
While blacks represent approximately 14 percent of the total U.S. population
, they accounted for almost half (44 percent) of all new HIV infections in
2010 (20,900).
我个人是非常反对same-Sex Marriage 。现在的父母们所处的环境绝对不同于我们的父
母几十年前的环境了。怎么教育孩子不受到伤害真不是一句空话。
authority
one
know
where
.
communicated
of
【在 n********h 的大作中提到】
: I am one of six adult children of gay parents who recently filed amicus
: briefs with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to respect the authority
: of citizens to keep the original definition of marriage: a union between one
: man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, so that children may know
: and may be raised by their biological parents. I also live in Canada, where
: same-sex marriage was federally mandated in 2005.
: I am the daughter of a gay father who died of AIDS. I described my
: experiences in my book: Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting.
: Over fifty adult children who were raised by LGBT parents have communicated
: with me and share my concerns about same-sex marriage and parenting. Many of
|
|
