You can't take away someone's rights over a threat you can't prove exists. The idea that all women and only women give off a "feminine influence", and that men do the opposite, is blatantly sexist. Sex and gender are two different things, one is biological, the other psychological, so yes, of course it does.

I don't understand what "threat" you are talking about. And I don't think anyone's rights should be taken away. My original post was about how I may not agree with a gay person's lifestyle but I don't think anyone has the right to enforce a gay person to "not be gay." I guess in our church we have different opinions on gender than you. I believe that men are men and some things come easier to them than they do to women, and vice versa. I don't think that's sexist, it's just natural. It's logical to me that the ideal family structure would be a husband and a wife, since they both have unique gifts they can offer their children. There are men and women who due to circumstances have to raise a child as a single parent. I am pretty sure you are already familiar with some of their stories about how difficult it is to be both a mother and a father at the same time. It's possible, but really hard to do. I am confused as to your statement that sex is psychological and gender is biological. I was conversing under the impression that sex and gender were the same thing.

The threat that children will grow up handicapped in some way if they have gay parents, and that therefore gay parents should not raise children. The terms are often used interchangeably, but your gender role is not tied to your physical body. It's a social construction.