[Mrs. Don-o]

I know that there are homosexuals and lesbians who are anti-abortion. I receive mailings and e-mails from PLAGAL (Pro Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians -- you can google that for more information, everybody) and I honor them inasmuch as they do defend the childrens' right to be born.

PLAGAL pretty regularly attends March for Life on both coasts:

http://www.plagal.org/pictures.html

I would even accept the statement that pro-life and pro-gay go together, **IF** (big if) by "pro-gay" we meant "pro-identifying people by their humanity, rather than by their misguided conduct."

But pro-gay generally means, in today's political parlance, "it's-OK-to-engage in disordered sexual conduct "it's OK to choose a disordered same-sex marriage," and "pro-same-sex adoption." And that is failing to defend children's right to be raised by a father and a mother. So it is not really pro-childrens' rights.

Any child raised in a MSM or WSW household is being intentionally deprived of either a father or of a mother. They are, by intent, forced to be either fatherless or motherless.

This does not really address the natural conditions under which children develop a confident organic sense of who they are. It would be immoral to accept such an arrangement, which is so often demanded in terms of adults' wants rather than children's needs.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Totally agree, Reformation Fan. See mine at #8.

[yongin]

if these gays are sincere about the pro-life movement, then i have no objections to them marching in right to life or even given speaking slots. the right to life movement is not a religious only movement. plus if you live in a deep blue area, you don’t have the luxury of picking allies.