So what you are saying is a gay man can't possibly have biological kids??
No, what I am saying is that if almost everything is different, the reality itself is different, then why should Alan Scott have kids at all? Why box the character into that role?
Al Pratt's walking around. By definition, that means this is a totally new ballgame.
Some of you guys can't have it both ways; you want change in books and concepts and call people out when somebody else doesn't, but then when someone acknowledges "Oh, this is different, might as well let the character be different and create a different legacy," then it seems that some of you are OK with things being the same when it's a direction you want to be the same.
Alan Scott was not gay. Now he is gay. Some people: "Hey, that's a great change. It's supposed to be a different Earth 2, so it's OK."
Alan Scott had two superhero kids named Jade and Obsidian. Now, some advocate...that Alan Scott has two superhero kids named Jade and Obsidian. Those people: "Well, we wanted change, supported change, but want that to stay the same."
How does that work, again? I'm trying to detect the microscopic difference between ridiculing somebody for wanting, say, Ted Kord to be alive and like he was before and advocating that Jade and Obsidian be alive and like they were before.