The French public strongly concurs. In all other respects, the French public strongly favors giving same-sex couples rights equal to married couples.

I used to review clinical trial designs for compliance with international standards for protection of human subjects. Given our present state of knowledge, it is easy for me to see how a government could decide that the placement of adoptive children with same-sex couples does not meet international standards for protection of the rights of experimental subjects.

This does not mean that gays and lesbians cannot be good parents. But the preponderance of experimental evidence points to a stable, low-stress marriage with the child’s biological parents as the ideal family form. This model is worth preserving for the sake of the majority of children who will be born to heterosexual couples.

I do not believe that approval of same-sex marriage will not change expectations for heterosexual marriage. Half of the gay married men in Massachusetts say they don’t place a high value on sexual fidelity. To me, this changes societal expectations for the words “husband” and “marriage”.

When the American Academy of Pediatrics came out with its statement in support of same-sex parenting, the organization received an unprecedented amount of critical feedback from its members. The natural response of the head of the committee which issued the statement was to express alarm that this negative feedback could damage the effort to use the Academy as a vehicle for positive change. Why wasn’t she instead curious about the views and experiences of the membership of the organization?

The leadership of our professional organizations is, at this time, heavily weighted with activists of one sort or another. People without a strong agenda don’t fight as hard for leadership in such organizations. It is hard for me to trust the “official positions” of these organizations because of the activist nature of their leadership.

Many existing studies of gay and lesbian parenting are characterized by poor study design, self-reporting by mothers and/or investigator bias. The data on same-sex parenting are very limited in sociological terms. We have no randomized generational studies.

We do now know that little children growing up without fathers (with single mothers) face a number of extra challenges. Girls enter puberty sooner and become sexually active at a younger age. Boys choose negative male role models. There are many additional negative statistical outcomes for these children.

“Father hunger” is well-recognized among the children of single moms. Rosie O’Donnell’s little boy wanted a daddy when he was six. One pro-lesbian parenting researcher found that some children of lesbian couples were obsessed with male images on television. One little boy had to be “pried off the leg” of a male day care worker every day. The child’s lesbian parents were happy that their child had a daddy substitute and that they didn’t have to worry about him because of this. The researcher wasn’t particularly concerned.

I can imagine certain situations where it would be preferable to place a child with a same-sex couple or a single parent. Even Catholic Charities sometimes placed children with same-sex couples before the same-sex marriage issue became a threat to their adoption services.

But I believe that the prudent course is to place most adoptive children with a mother and father. I don’t want the government to direct adoptions on the basis of fairness to prospective parents with different sexual orientations rather than on the basis of the best interests of the child.

I don’t think that the effects of same-sex parenting on children will be well-characterized until this family form becomes common in low-income areas for a generation. Future objective studies may be scuttled by civil rights concerns as married same-sex couples become a “protected class” with equal rights to children. We may be limited in our ability to make life better for both the children of heterosexual couples and the children of same-sex couples in the future because of the stridency of gay activists.

I don’t know how to explain to a little adopted child that his or her desire for a daddy or mommy takes second place to the rights of same-sex parents. Same-sex parents from the intellectual set may be able to compensate for this deprivation adequately. I am not as optimistic for children of same-sex couples in low-income areas after observing the attitudes toward children’s needs in various non-traditional heterosexual family forms in my town.

The response of gay advocates to the LEGAL voting against a status that was shoved down Californian’s throats by legal fiat shows how little respect homosexuals have for the institution of marriage, since they see it as little more than a social entitlement.

I’m glad to hear the gay marriage activists finally acknowledge that their court strategy isn’t good for them or America. I’m prepared to fight the good fight at the ballot box, so should they.