“But same sex couples already have children!” This is not, strictly speaking, an idiotic comment, since it is a statement of fact. However, I want to call your attention to the exasperated gasp (EG for short) that usually accompanies this comment. The EG is designed to intimidate the listener into believing that some deeply important conclusion follows instantly and obviously from the observation that same sex couples already have children in their homes. The Exasperated Gasp is supposed to convey that the whole issue is a done deal, and we shouldn’t offer any resistance to further social change. Let’s examine this. What exactly is it that supposedly follows automatically and obviously?
Same sex couples should be encouraged to have more children. No, that doesn’t follow. You’d have to make an argument to support that conclusion.
Same sex couples will continue to have more children, no matter what the law does or doesn’t do. No, that doesn’t follow either. As a matter of fact, the law can, if it chooses, make it quite difficult for same sex couples to share parenting rights.
Same sex couples have children the same way opposite sex couples do. No, that is manifestly untrue. The Exasperated Gasp is meant to divert attention from the fact that same sex couples can only have a child if someone gives them one, or at least one of the gametes needed to create a child. Same sex couples need assistance from the legal, social and medical establishments in order to give birth to children, and to have legal parenting rights to those children. No where in the Exasperated Gasp is there any explanation at all, or even any attempt at an explanation, as to why anyone ought to assist same sex couples to achieve their reproductive goals or whether anyone has a moral duty to assist them.
Same sex couples should be allowed to marry so “their” children can have all the benefits of marriage. No, this doesn’t follow either. This assumes that the “marriage” of a same sex couple will work in the same way as the marriage of a man and a woman. This is highly doubtful. We already know that in terms of economic behavior, male couples are different from female couples, and both are different from married couples. We also know that separation rates (ie divorces) are different for male couples and for female couples and both are different (higher, like way higher) than for married couples. We have no reason to assume that same sex “marriage” will function in the same way, and convey all the same benefits to children, as natural, conjugal marriage does.
So, to answer our opening question, What exactly is it that supposedly follows automatically and obviously? Answer: Absolutely nothing follows automatically and obviously. The points that we are meant to infer are either not obviously true, (and hence require an actual argument) or not true at all.
The true statement, But same sex couples already have children!” accompanied by an Exasperated Gasp, is either an intimidation tactic, or another idiotic comment. Take your pick.
