"I do not approve of the militant gay agenda (of which Cheney is not a part, btw) because it is seeking to corrupt the ideal. However, I fundamentally support the liberty of others to make choices with which I do not agree in their private lives and without the need for approval from the majority of the population."
This is really the heart of the argument: Moral clarity vs. liberty. A free society must adapt some level of moral responsibility in order to preserve that freedom - otherwise it moves toward anarchy and social relativism. The founding fathers were not even totally in agreement over the degree to which religion should infuse a society. Maybe the gay parents i've known were bad examples, or maybe I'm a religious whacko, but the whole gay parenting thing is just not sitting right in my heart.
I would say that liberty is an example of moral clarity. Like it or not - people have free will and in our country that free will is acknowledeged with the freedom to make choices about how one will live one's life - regardless of whether some people approve of it or not.
Freedom of choice is at the heart of what self-government is all about.
You know, I wish I had the answers here. I've not known a lot of gay parents and the ones I do know where in heterosexual married relationships when they had children and where not out at the time. Needless to say, that creates a lot of problems in and of itself and in the end, the kids are about as messed up as the rest of us. I have also known A LOT of messed up people from traditional families, broken families and families with weird sexual issues. So I just don't know. This old world is really messed up by sin, there is no doubt in my mind.
Most of the gay folks I know are childless and prefer to keep it that way. They are not particularly militant and live quiet productive lives blending in with the rest of us. Everyone knows, their significant others are included as significant others, but we just don't talk about it much. We just behave like normal people. It's out, but it isn't really that important to any of us. It's there, but no one obsesses about it, or talks about it, or anything. It just is. A kid in the room in the 1950s probably wouldn't have had a clue until High School, and maybe not even then...although in this day and age with the gay agenda front and center in the msm and popular media, most kids would have a passing understanding by the time they were in second or third grade. Not of the specifics, but a general clue. It really irritates me that is the case.
As far as gay parenting goes, I understand. I have really mixed feelings, mostly based on the issues surrounding healthy development of sexual identity for the children. Frankly, I just haven't done any research on it simply because it doesn't affect me personally. I am a Christian, and take the Biblical admonitions seriously, although to be fair it's pretty easy for a straight person. Some of the other things are MUCH harder for me to comply with! : D Finally, I have SEVERE problems with gay adoptions for myriad reasons, but think it gets much less murky in situations when there is a biological parent.
What it comes down to for me is this. Society should hold up the traditional family as the ideal: Married Dad and Mom, then kids. The government should make policy that does not interfere with or weaken that institution...and may also do things that would strengthen it because we do know that the societies with the largest traditionally organized family structures are the healthiest.
That is why I am vehemently anti-gay marriage. It reduces marriage to sex, which is frankly ridiculous and seriously messed up. Issues of homosexuality, divorce, remarriage, single and/or out of wedlock parenthood, adultery, promiscuity and other cohabitation/sexual situations are all issues of choice and resulting consequences and must be tolerated in the name of Liberty, but not celebrated as "just the same and as good as." traditional marriage and family.