Federal Judge To Wisconsin: You Know 'Traditional' Marriage Was Polygamy, Right?

False and repeatedly refuted. Saying marriage is required in order to procreate, is NOT saying procreation is required in order to marry. This is really an elementary logic error.

All dogs have four legs
This table has four legs
Therefore, this table is a dog

Can't you see that you have it backwards? I will repeat: Saying marriage is required to procreate is NOT saying procreation is required to marry.

 

No one is saying any such thing other than YOU and your strawman.

 

Marriage is not based on the "right to procreate". Procreation is entirely optional, and has nothing to do with marriage.

What can I say, except I think you're wrong, everyone else thinks you're wrong, the courts have ALL ruled that you are wrong. And fortunately, public opinion combined with unanimous legal verdicts mean you're wrong in practice.

 

the right to marriage is based upon the right to procreate. Being optional doesnt conflict with that fact. The requirement of procreation was your strawman, not my argument.

 

You are saying this now. Wait until we have a fertility crisis and there isn't enough tax paying citizens.

 

Sarah was not Moses' wife nor was Hagar a servant of Moses or his family, Zipporah was the wife of Moses (Exodus 2:11-22; 18:3-4). Additionally, the Bible makes no mention about Moses having children by anyone other than his wife (for all I know he may have, but nothing says so either way). If you are going to challenge Christian faith I would hope that you at least have your facts straight.

 

I apologize - I meant Abraham

 

Barbara Crabb is right.