Just a few thoughts to stir the pot, and a rhetoric check… A lot of posts here suggest that a "loving family" should be the criteria, butfrom a policy standpoint how do you define "loving"?

I know, I know, you know it when you see it, but isn't that too subjective for law? I would include in a definition of love the values of discipline, self-control and commitment - virtues which are not much attached to sexuality in our culture, straight or gay…

I also believe it is best for a child to know the influence of both male and female in the family. To discard this as if it doesn't matter seems a form of sexism…

How does the logic of the argument apply to bi-sexual people? To those who are into bestiality? Where do we draw the lines? And why?

To compare "good" homosexuals with "bad" heterosexuals is rhetorically manipulative and not very helpful in grappling with the issues at hand… And finally, I'm sorry I missed the "Gay Adoption" documentary, but if I had to guess, I would say it was an advocacy piece in which homosexuals were presented in the best possible light and anyone who disagreed, particularly from a religious point of view, were presented as stereotypical, imbecilic, illogical morons… when was the last time you saw anyone even question, let alone disagree with, a homosexual on TV without being obviously pointed out as a "fundamentalist", fanatic idiot? Open minded, indeed…

Sorry to upset the apple cart, just wanted to express an alternative view