Pat G,
homosexuality is part of 'nature's design' too, as it is innate.

Technically the only way to sever a child from the biological sperm or egg donor, is through abortion; or perhaps, contraception?
If medical abortion is permitted; along with contraception for even more valid health reasons, then why not surrogacy?
If invitro-fertilisation is okay for infertile couples, then why not surrogacy?
If adoption is okay, which also disadvantages the biological, if impoverished parents, then why not informed consent surrogacy?
There are places in the world where consenting parents will sell a child, but particularly a female one?
If that's acceptable or allowed or somehow formalised, even where the extremely unfortunate child is sold into sexual slavery, then why not informed consent surrogacy/adoption, as an alternative, that places the child, regardless of gender, in a very safe and loving stable advantageous environment, then why not?
But particularly if it allows impoverished couples, to back away from having to decide to sell a child into bondage or slavery?
It's time that this debate got real and faced all the relevant facts, rather than the very selective subjective ones! Rhrosty.

McReal
The Human Genome Project & studies of identical twins have both found that, while there may be a genetic predisposition towards homosexuality, homosexuality is not innate.

Beaker,
There is virtually no evidence that homosexuality has a significant genetic basis - if you think you have some, it would be appropriate to post a reference or link.

The testimony of almost all homosexuals is that *homosexuality is innate* and that is overwhelmingly significant. Of course, there will be a 'degree' of bisexuality and other non-singularity in the continuum of human sexuality, but those are small 'degrees'.

I don't see Jim's argument as a slippery slope one, and I don't understand why no-one has yet defended the right of the polygamous to marry. It's interesting that the Anglican Church will recognise polygamous marriage in societies that have historically practiced it, such as PNG.

McReal

'Also, plenty of heteros also have perverse lifestyles, runner.'

so true McReal, however they are not trying to have them recognised by the law and pretending that they are equal to the God given institution of marriage.

you also ask

'what has gay marriage and gay couples seeking to raise children got to do with killing babies?

the debate in the 60's and 70's was suppose to be about the poor teenage girl who after being raped had to carry another man's baby. Of course that is the deceitful arguement used by the social engineers who now are please we have open slaughter. The same people now arrogantly dismiss the slipery slope arguement for 'gay'marriage. They deliberately ignore history and gag reason by their deceitful tactics. They deny the obvious affect on fatherless children and demonise anyone speaking what is obvious.