There was once upon a time a woman who loved a man like a brother who knew he really wanted children but was gay. So she agreed to be an egg donor. Another woman agrees to be a surrogate. The gay man's sperm and the woman who loved him's egg was implanted in a surrogate and conceived a child that was then adopted by the man and his partner-a gay couple. True Story. Repeated a thousand times around the world. The one close enough that you might have heard about is Elton John and partner David who now have two children by that method. Should the church refuse to baptize such children? Should the church wish they had never been conceived 'in the best interest of the child.' Another true story: Two gay men who worked for a University had been monogamous together for about a decade. They had established themselves in the community and did lots of volunteer work for a church. They met through working with immigrants subject to deportation a woman who was illegally in the country being deported back to her home country of Senegal. She found out during her deportation proceedings she was pregnant. Because she was being deported penniless she wanted to abort the child. They offered to pay for everything she needed if only she would not abort. They then adopted the child- an African child to a white gay couple. This child would no doubt never have been born without this loving gay couple. The Angry, Zealots who refuse gay marriage seem to me to be so moronic and ignorant of what is going on in the world. In England over a quarter of all children under the age of 30 now have been conceived using some form of invitro. That is also against the rigid catholic church doctrine. Should they all not be baptized also? A woman died and left a widower husband and a small son. The husband was despirately in love with his wife but she died. He discovered he was bisexual. He found a lover after she died. They lived together and together raised his son. They for all practical purposes were married. What does the church do about that? Tell them not to be gay? Constitutionally there are serious problems with equal protection grounds that should in my view overrule gay marriage as a constitutional right. However in common sense there are fewer problems understanding what a government should do. That 800,000 people in France- a country in which women could not even vote until after WWII--would take to the streets to break up families that are not male-female spouses strikes me as horrendously stupid. What right do you have to tell anyone who they have to love or cannot love? Priests, who easily are told and believe they can marry NO ONE have no problem telling other people what they have no business telling anyone- you cannot marry that person. They are so lacking in identity as a person of any identity often they let someone living in a country thousands of miles away tell them they cannot marry anyone. A quarter are estimated to be repressed homosexuals who chose celibacy from a desire to suppress their natural attractions. Those are sometimes so secretly self loathing they despise happy gays. No, Sorry --you are wrong. Your ideology has cost you friends and supporters.