The argument that is being debated now falls, in terms of some of its aspects (not cohabitation in general so much as
male homosexual couples specifically), within limits that are held to be inviolable.
Not exact matches
Relatively faster performance when the task involved moving the manikin toward the gay
male couple was taken as a sign of implicit attraction, rather than aversion, toward
homosexual men.
It clearly matters for the
homosexual couple: They want to have their own kid, and they'll use «female sperm» or «
male eggs» to make it happen.
NP:
Couples, (one
male and one female) who are living together outside the bonds of matrimony, are told the very same things as lifestyle - living
homosexuals are told.
st Corinthians 6:9 - 10 — the word
homosexual was added later by a prejudice scribe, most scholars will tell you it's about
male prostitution and nothing in there is about the saved long term relationship of a gay
couple as we know and understand it today.
Or again, if the
male couple does not wish to enter into such a «partnership» with a lesbian
couple, the
male homosexuals can make use of the gestation services that can be provided, but only in certain foreign countries — which raises the question of the recognition of the child's rights upon the child's return to France.
There is no question of denying the suffering experienced by
homosexual couples, whether
male or female, owing to their infertility — a suffering they share with heterosexual
couples who can not procreate.
The sperm might be provided by a
couple of
male homosexuals who would then function as co-parents for the child, who would thus have four parents.
Homosexual male couples who are using donor eggs also turn to a gestational carrier to have a child.
In the following studies, the investment model should be applied to
homosexuals, married
couples,
male victims, and other participants who have a different social economic status to generalize the investment model's validity.