It wasnt his core argument though. I enticed an argument out of him from a comment that gay people werent normal (or something to an effect).<quoted text>
But his argument is illogical. If his main point is concerning stability for the benefit of the child, then he should be ranting against divorce which compromises that stability, and should be in favor of gay marriage which encourages stability.
My counter was that study that said children from gay marriages were just as happy or more happy (and stable) than straight marriages.
He didnt exactly disagree, in fact, he acknowledged that stable marriages produce stable children, regardless. I give him credit for that.
But then he slipped in again a note about gays not being normal. Which could mean a variety of things, I suppose. I know he worked in retail with "swishy" people (to quote him), so he notions may be a little skewed. Overall, still not as bad as Hughbe, I dont detect hate on a visceral level.