http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/04/dan-quayle-was-right/307015/
There are ALTERNATIVES to the traditional nuclear family, but there is no SUBSTITUTE for the traditional nuclear family The traditional nuclear family produces IN THE AGGREGATE better outcomes in all key areas of development than do other family arrangements. There are certainly situations in which it is best for a parent to leave the other parent and make a go of it as a single parent, but that's not the RULE.
It is not bigoted to assert that the traditional nuclear family produces better outcomes in the aggregate than other forms of societal organization. It is not a mere "wedge issue" for a politician to advocate public policy that encourages formation and maintenance of the traditional nuclear biological family. I say this as a man who married his spouse at age 37 and adopted her children, and who, with the same spouse, adopted a grandchild (out of need) at ages 53 and 55. (My spouse, for years, was a single parent not by choice; she was deserted by a husband.) I'm not judging anyone's personal situation, but it's irresponsible to create public policy on families that treat each type of family organization as the equal of the other when the traditional family produces better outcomes to the point where it's amazing that the issue of outcomes is even debated.
ah, the old "demonising non-traditional x is just supporting traditional x" deflection. thought you were smarter than that, tbh.
