The argument is that stable families are the corner stone of our society. Not that the argument means a damn thing. It just sounds good and appeals to people on an emotional level. The human race in general, and Christians specifically are in no danger of dying out any time soon. Continuation of the species is not an immediate concern. In fact, our current growth is rapidly out pacing our resources. It might be beneficial to the species if there were fewer births for a while.
Then there is the 'naturual' argument which is just patently silly. There is very little about our present lives that is natural. And, homosexuality is found in nature, so double fail.
Don't take my next question the wrong way, as I realize you are only explaining, rather than advocating, a position.
Assuming for argument's sake it is true that homosexual relationships, whether legally sanctioned or not, are less stable than heterosexual ones, still
, what threat do the detractors of homosexuals perceive to the stability of the families of heterosexual couples? Do they fear that inside every domesticated heterosexual is a frothing homosexual, waiting only for legislative blessing to cast aside duty to spouse and spawn and give full vent to his or her repressed appetites? Or, is the concern that otherwise monogamous heterosexuals will now take the wanton homosexual relationship as their model of fideltiy? I am generally disinclined to assume that homophobia is born of self-denial and self-loathing, but....