Totally ridiculous. History is full of women (sisters, mothers and grandmothers, friends, etc.) bringing up children alone because the children's fathers had died or left the family to go to war, or even because they were away at sea for decades.
It is normal for children to be brought up by women. In traditional Christian and Jewish practice, it is also normal for a man to be part of this, but as a providing parent rather than a nuturing parent.
I am not saying there is anything wrong with a male parent who is more involved in the life of his kids. What I am saying is that these gay "activists" are trying to take a biological predisposition (women bring up children) and turn it into something sexual, which it is not and never had been.
"Totally ridiculous. History is full of women (sisters, mothers and grandmothers, friends, etc.) bringing up children alone because the children's fathers had died or left the family to go to war, or even because they were away at sea for decades."
Not ridiculous at all. It has been shown that children KNOW THE DIFFERENCE between a tragedy that can't be helped and a situation that flows from the parents selfishness.
"It is normal for children to be brought up by women. In traditional Christian and Jewish practice, it is also normal for a man to be part of this, but as a providing parent rather than a nuturing parent."
For most of the history of the world children had two parents. Your understanding of history doesn't go back to before the American century despite the fact that you cite Jewish history. The sad truth is that the feminist revolution took woman away from their kids but the forgotten part is that the Industrial Revolution took dad. Before that dads were very much a part of their kids world. Your placing greater emphasis upon the mothers role is a modern delusion.
"I am not saying there is anything wrong with a male parent who is more involved in the life of his kids. What I am saying is that these gay "activists" are trying to take a biological predisposition (women bring up children) and turn it into something sexual, which it is not and never had been."
I've read and re-read this last para and can make no sense of it at all.