"Oh, it’s very simple. It’s absolutely very simple. I have a doctorate in sociology from NYU, and I know what the literature says. The literature is definitive. There is one gold standard, one gold standard for children. That is: there is no substitute for a marriage between a man and a woman."
I assume by "literature" that you mean your own papers that you've authored that, surprise, support your opinion. I'm assuming this because, so far as I know, actual research on the subject says no such thing.
Citing research isn't quite as effective when you only cite the ones that agree with you--particularly when they're your own.
"I want the law to discriminate against straight people who live together I used to call it 'shacking up,' but now it’s called cohabitation."
Yes, and I want a law that prevents people posting stupid shit on the internet. By the looks of your post we're both out of luck.
"I want the law to discriminate against all alternative lifestyles, against gays and unions."
Look, "Doc", nobody gives a fuck what you want. You just aren't that important, Ph.D. or not.
"I want to promote and to put in a privileged position that institution of marriage between a man and a woman, which has been shown over and over to be the gold standard."
Why, you're right! It's been a gold standard in cultures around the world--for the last few centuries or so. Prior to that it was usually one man and as many women as he could manage to support, and a few mistresses on the side.
Where people like you come up with this idea that marriage has always been "between a man and a woman" I'll never know. Maybe you should take a trip over to NYU's Cultural Anthropology department and talk to them for a while about this whole marriage thing. Maybe they can disabuse you of this delusion you seem to be under.
