One of the insidious rationalizations used to permit same-sex married couples to adopt children argues that life in a home, rather than an institution, serves the best interests of orphans. While the adopted child in these situations may enjoy a quality of life that rescues him from poverty and homelessness and receive the benefits of proper food, housing, education and medical care, he does not experience a normal, natural family life. If the child is a boy adopted by two men, he does not learn how a husband appreciates, honors, pleases and sacrifices for his wife. The boy has no ideal or model of husband and father for imitation as he grows into manhood, and he never acquires an understanding of chivalry, the willingness of a man to serve a woman he loves. He receives no prior education for marriage and learns nothing about a boy’s relationship with his mother. To have no experiential knowledge of a mother or maternal figure desensitizes a man and does not acquaint him with a woman’s sensibility—an important area of knowledge in preparation for marriage. If a boy cannot please or love his mother or understand her female nature, he lacks an important introduction to married life.