He had me in the first piece, until he started talking about "the polity". I think that, if the laws are changing, then "the polity" must be behind said changes. The rest of his argument on that front is progressively weaker.

The second article lost me right away. Maybe it's just the "for the children" thing. In any case, I couldn't get behind it. If we want to do something "for the children", maybe we should first work on all the shitty role models in two-parent families already out there, rather than worrying about the tiny percentage of LGBT parents, who (if they're ambitious enough to raise kids) will probably provide better role models to their kids, regardless of their "non-traditional" family unit.