I hear this sort of thing a lot from liberals:
“The first three-quarters of the presentation were really good,” said Bliss. “They talked about what is marriage and how marriage helps us as a society. Then it started going downhill when they started talking about single parents and adopted kids. They didn’t directly say it, but they implied that kids who are adopted or live with single parents are less than kids with two parents of the opposite sex. They implied that a ‘normal’ family is the best family.”
Translation: marriage makes people more awesome, but how dare you say people who aren’t married are less awesome. The idea has to be kept abstract because it’s so brazenly wrong; when it becomes real it upsets people. On the other hand, people are really attached to that abstraction.
I fall on the “marriage isn’t all that important” side of the argument, so it’s natural for me to dislike it when people say single parents are awful or same-sex couples (in states without marriage) can’t raise kids.
But what about people who think that sheet of paper changes every fiber of a person’s being? How can they possibly get upset when people take that argument to its logical conclusion?