I don't see that recognising the reality of homosexuality is in any way "celebrating" it. It is what it is, and Pride in it's original form as was simply a way of showing that homosexual people are normal members of society.
I struggle with the primacy/paramount of breeding and family. I certainly don't think there is a free-floating duty…
I don't see that recognising the reality of homosexuality is in any way "celebrating" it. It is what it is, and Pride in it's original form as was simply a way of showing that homosexual people are normal members of society.
I struggle with the primacy/paramount of breeding and family. I certainly don't think there is a free-floating duty to breed and form groupings (families) within which to raise children, but I'm open to the idea that it is to be encouraged.
Again, we seem to be talking at cross purposes. When I say "normal", I mean ordinary people who are equal but different. I couldn't care less about trivia regarding partners, wants and lifestyle since it is irrelevant to almost everything - especially reproduction, which is what you are focusing on (though it is becoming more important with the number of gay men using surrogate mothers to have children - which of course means they fit into your category of "reproductive").
I'm in the UK, married and with children, and there are no tax breaks for either condition that I am aware of. That may be a broader topic at a later time. However, I will categorically state that I neither follow the religious idea that "Marriage is for the purpose of having children", nor that "Children must only be born in marriage". Far too much misery has come from both those tropes over the centuries.
You may think you are on a moral high horse, but it isn't even a Shetland pony.
Fertility isn't being driven down by anything other than women choosing to control it. Society wide, raising children has become stupidly expensive and as with anything that becomes more expensive, you get less of it.
For most of human history, children were assets; now they are liabilities (at least in developed economies, and that is precisely where the birth rates have plummeted). China is the notable exception and that was because of draconian state control.
I don't see that recognising the reality of homosexuality is in any way "celebrating" it. It is what it is, and Pride in it's original form as was simply a way of showing that homosexual people are normal members of society.
I struggle with the primacy/paramount of breeding and family. I certainly don't think there is a free-floating duty to breed and form groupings (families) within which to raise children, but I'm open to the idea that it is to be encouraged.
Again, we seem to be talking at cross purposes. When I say "normal", I mean ordinary people who are equal but different. I couldn't care less about trivia regarding partners, wants and lifestyle since it is irrelevant to almost everything - especially reproduction, which is what you are focusing on (though it is becoming more important with the number of gay men using surrogate mothers to have children - which of course means they fit into your category of "reproductive").
I'm in the UK, married and with children, and there are no tax breaks for either condition that I am aware of. That may be a broader topic at a later time. However, I will categorically state that I neither follow the religious idea that "Marriage is for the purpose of having children", nor that "Children must only be born in marriage". Far too much misery has come from both those tropes over the centuries.
You may think you are on a moral high horse, but it isn't even a Shetland pony.
Fertility isn't being driven down by anything other than women choosing to control it. Society wide, raising children has become stupidly expensive and as with anything that becomes more expensive, you get less of it.
For most of human history, children were assets; now they are liabilities (at least in developed economies, and that is precisely where the birth rates have plummeted). China is the notable exception and that was because of draconian state control.