But why do you assume these rights of children to support you point of view? I think you are projecting your own idea of what is best onto 'what is best for the children'.
In this manner, you are not the champion of children's rights, but still just an (unwitting) champion of using children to support private preferences of adults.
Wherever possible, we should ask children in specific cases whom they'd prefer as adoptive parents. Children - most parents refuse to believe this - are not hardwired for a pixel-perfect, Disney channel movie, heterosexual nuclear family of two parents of the opposite sex. Not until children pick these things up from wider society do they have much of a clue to any normality of their family situation. And by that time, children are raised by themselves and their peer group. Parents overestimate their importance. A child needs attention and food and warmth and devotion, but other than that a child could not care less whether you exactly conform to any desirable social requirement. That sort of neuroticism is for the parents - who should not project that on children.
Millions of single mothers, single dads are told they have an imperfect family situation. They stress about it, worry about it, consider it a sign of failure. Whereas it does not seem to be the case at all that children of single parents fare worse than those with two parents. The same holds true for working mothers. So much guilt. So much guilt by so many women, for not being with their children 24/7. For no reason at all, I think.
I think gay parenting belongs to the same category as single parents, or working mothers. And less to the category of 1970s social experiment.
Bookmarks