INTRODUCTION (Lino Bertuzzi)
I put here an article written by Antonio Palmieri, which is not a real piece of ethical philosophy, or moral, but it is useful to show the absurd of certain proposals that show the level of morals decay reached in Western society and relativist thought of the damage.

On Saturday, June 20, I was in Piazza San Giovanni in Rome, to attend the demonstration called to defend the natural family. It 'was a party of people, a peaceful, joyful people, strong and convinced of his own ideas.
It 'was an "abnormal" event. In fact those who participated paid expenses from their own pocket, it was a grassroots mobilization and the majority of speeches from the stage were not comitia, but explanations of the contents of events, the inherent dangers in the bill on civil unions and in the action of "cultural experimentation" on children that pro 'gender' initiatives are producing, starting from kindergarten.
Mind you. No homophobic intent from anyone. I think legitimate to recognize the rights of each individual and that there should not be discrimination of any kind.
But I went to the streets (and to the Senate I will oppose to these initiatives) because the civil unions proposed by Senator Cirinnà are nethier more nor less than a wedding under an assumed name, because they apply to such an union, all the provisions that the Civil Code and the current rules give to the family.
So? What's wrong if two people of the same sex want to marry? The fact is that if there is a "marriage", hence it derives its right to a child.
In fact the first grievance, the first action, the European Court rather than our Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court would decide definitely that this type of marriage has the right to have children.
And since no homosexual couple can beget directly a child, the way is to open to adoptions, or at heterologous fertilization and the womb for rent. And so? Havn't they no right even to be parents? The fact is that there is no right to have a child, being homosexual or not doesn't matter.
Does it matter at no human being can "get" another human being. A child is not an object to have at all costs. No human being can have is "right".
With gay marriage, given the limits imposed by nature, the child inevitably becomes an object, a product.

Second question. Always because a child is a subject of rights and not an object to be manipulated, no one can use children as guinea pigs to propagate an ideology that goes against nature, the evidence, and the reality.
It's clear that we are born male and female and this affects our whole being. To dress males like females and vice versa, to invite children to touch each other and touch themselves, or other such experiments actually occurred in Italian schools, has nothing to do with education in respect for others and their differences.
That's why last Saturday I was in piazza. To demonstrate in favour of the family as it has always been, because we are made so. To reaffirm that children are a subject with rights not a subject which adults can arrange to their liking. Politics and law should protect the weakest. In this case children. Thanks for your attention.

Antonio Palmieri