Gay Rights Activists Introduce Initiative that Would Require Children in Marriages

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by centaur532

http://www.kndo.com/Global/story.asp...av=menu484_2_8



I find this sneaky and satirical. I love it! Mainly because 'marriages are for procreating couples only' is a ridiculous anti-gay marriage argument.

Ditto.

[PeppyGPhiB]

I can't believe people actually think the gay community really thinks this should be a law. It was obviously introduced in order to make a point, which it does pretty effectively I think. That is, once people get passed the emotional response to this bill. It of course won't pass, they know it won't pass, and the two sides of the argument re: the supreme court ruling will get a lot of press.

Unfortunately too many people will just label the sponsors of this bill as nuts and just leave it at that.

[UGAalum94]

Was the language about heterosexual procreation actually in legislation to oppose gay marriage, instead of just the arguments about gay marriage?

On some level the procreation requirement is funny and calls attention to the issue, but I also wonder if the argument kind of backfires because I think the vast majority of heterosexual marriages do produce children.

Sure some people just form couples, but for a lot of people it's the first step towards starting a family.

Anyone know the percentage?

What if heteros were willing to accept those terms; no marriage is valid without offspring; no marriage benefits to couples without children? I think many Bible thumpers would be cool with that because they do have kids.


ETA: I see now that it was the language of the supreme court decision.