And All States of Hormonal Balance Are Not Equally Healthy
We all should know now that everyone has male and female hormones to varying degrees and in varying balance. The balance is delicate and changes during menapause, manopause, and puberty. There are 'endocrine disruptors' which also alter the delicate balance. Flouride in water, chemicals in cleaning products, synthetic hormones in protein food sources (meat, chicken, etc.), birth control pill synthetic hormones passing through waste into the water supply all have been identified as endocrine disruptors. Stress can trigger hormonal reactions. Breakdowns of marriage affects small children who have trauma based stress levels that can alter the hormonal archtiecture of small children and perhaps fix their resultant orientation.
There are thousands and thousands of people who have recognized that their orientation and emotional life is hormonally triggered, as all transexuals know because they have to undergo hormone therapy to reorient themselves.
If something is reversible, healthy or not, should it have the same protected status as a human trait like race.
The nature/nurture debate is not over and it is not immaterial. If hormonal issues, endocrine disruptors create gayness that can be healed, does or should the Constitution make that condition equal to heterosexual procreative potential?
The issue of adoption and children of same sex units is problematic because the child has an interest in knowing for all kinds of reasons (emotional, medical, psychological) who their biological parents are and be afforded an opportunity to when possible forge relationships with both their biological parents, one of whom may have been forced for reasons of economic depression or lack to think they could not raise their own child.
Every human has a male and female biological parent by God's design. A same sex couple does not express that. A same sex couple deprives a child of one or the other of the gender exposure in the home.
Because same sex couples do not have procreative capacity to themselves create children, definitionally, when they want children they are taking someone else's. When a married hetero couple have children and the gay man leaves to marry another gay man, if that union has the same status legally as a hetero union, and the two male couple make more money than the stay at home unemployed biological mother, the court can rule that the child go where the affluence is in the 'best interest of the child' which has the capacity to emotionally destroy some women who gave up everything for their families only to be cheated on by seducing gay men.
Everything not expressly delegated to the Federal Government under the Constitution is and should be left to the States under basic 10th Amendment federalist principles. There is no better example of where the wisdom of that supports a moral outcome.