The APA's official stance (one borne out by my personal experience with gay families) is that there is no difference in the well-being of children raised by two same-sex parents or two opposite-sex parents.
"...the results of existing research comparing lesbian and gay parents to heterosexual parents and children of lesbian and gay parents to children of heterosexual parents are quite clear: Common stereotypes are not supported by the data."
I wasn't answering with my belief, nor was I saying that gay parents are worse, but trying to get at where the root of apprehension might lie with liberal-minded folks, such as the case was in the article.
What I was trying to say is that such a belief is fairly prevalent and well short of nutjobbery.
I've had this debate before (strangely enough, at a faith-based LGBT family meeting with leaders of the Willow Creek megachurch in Chicago), and that particular point has been a sore sticking point. In its weak form (as you've presented) it does nothing to address the matter of LGBT parents, and in its strong form (gay parents are worse), it contradicts pretty much all available evidence.
The gender of the two parents didn't seem to have much of an impact.
That's probably more important - having both types of personality present?
Whenever I see gay couples on documentaries etc, there almost always seems to be one 'feminine' one, and one 'masculine' one. Regardless of what sex they actually are.
So no, you are not likely to find the "male"/"female" pattern among gay couples, but since it's not even common among straight couples, I strongly doubt it's relevant for raising children.
Most couples have pretty strongly defined roles. For example, if a shelf needs putting up, it's more than likely that the male will be tasked with this. If a daughter is after makeup advice, it's likely that they'll go to their mother rather than father.
Perhaps you're reading way more into what I'm saying than is actually there.
However, when it comes to gay relationships, you generally can't make any prediction about who does what or how the chores are divided. The notion that all relationships have (or worse: has to have) a "male" and a "female" is completely unfounded.
• It's not hard to argue that it's good for a child to have a mom and a dad. I'm not going to get into such, but whether or not you agree, let's just accept that it's not a wild notion.
• Adoption is one of the few places where there's any chance for society to evaluate the fitness of parents before they can have children. Usually it just happens.
• A male-male couple (edit: or single male, or infertile female(s)) is the only combination that's forced into adoption, thus with the prior two points in mind, it's the only one where they are ipso facto subjected to societal evaluation, for a coupling that some consider less than perfect for children.
Now the reality is that most sets of parents are far from ideal. No doubt two loving gay parents is healthier than quarrelsome straight parents. But if quarrelsome parents are knocked up biology, not society sets the conditions.