Males and Females, in principle, can procreate. Are you denying that you were born from a male/female couple?
And they were married by a justice of the Peace in a civil ceremony. And I married my wife of 28 years without any intention or possibility of procreation. Marriage has zero to do with procreation. You can bandy about your “in principle” crap forever, but in the meantime thousands of couples who have no desire or viable eggs or sperm will continue to get legally married. End of story.
Ok, so you admit that you were born from a male/female couple. That means that between a male and a female couple, procreation is possible. YOU are proof of that. If you don't wish to procreate, that is fine. But that's my point exactly. You are able to procreate, as you are male and female. In other words, procreation is possible, in principle. Yup, and they can do so because they can procreate IN PRINCIPLE, as I have described above.
Well it's theoretically possible that a man and a female sheep can procreate. that's a stupid definitive characteristic.
An acronym is a set of initials that make up a word, or a set of letters that can be read like a word. Otherwise it is initialism. So ARF (Anal Retentive Fallacy) would be an acronym, but CTLSMIU (Can't Think Logically So Make It Up) would not.
In principle or in theory is irrelevant to rule of law. A Homosexual couple with two children are much more appropriate for the legal institution of marriage than an infertile heterosexual couple. Procreation — or the potential there of — has not ever been and is not currently a requirement for marriage.
Since you are now denying your very own existence, which is completely irrational, there is no way for this discussion to advance any further.
The point of marriage is the ability, in principle, to have kids. Male and female couples, in theory, CAN reproduce. That's precisely how you came into being. Are you denying this?
demonstrably false. There is not, nor has there ever been, a requirement that a couple be capable of procreating in order to marry. Not in principle or in theory. entirely irrelevant to marriage.
WRONG. It has always been. It quite literally was a requirement for marriage, even in the legal sense, until only a few years ago when the legal definition was redefined.
That is what we are talking about — the legal definition. I don’t care what some pegan ritual said. My point stands.
at no time in the history of this county, has procreation ever been a requirement for marriage. at no point in the history of the US was it ever a requirement.
Yes, and a few years before that interracial marriage was illegal. And before that women couldn’t vote. And before that black people were property. Do you have a point?
That's an appeal to legalism which is a logical fallacy. As much time as you spend a very long conversation squawk about fallacies you make a lot of them yourself. Funny how I can argue against you even though you make fallacies? At one time it was illegal to drink alcohol. At another time it was legal to own a person as a slave. Laws evolve. That's why we have a legislative branch and judicial branch of government. This isn't a monarchy
except for polygamy even though they can have kids, and interspecies couples even though they can procreate in theory a man can procreate with 36 different women so you should be for polygamous marriage. You need to quit lying about this being the principal it's clearly not. It's just some data point you pick to randomly to say that same-sex marriage isn't marriage. I know this because you shift to the goalposts after I asked you about polygamy and interspecies relationships. You said one man and one woman because that's how you define it. I'm sorry you're not Supreme dictator of the world you don't get to set definitions.
This whole thread is crap. Everyone is entitled to the same rights, which includes marriage. Americans, of all people. taking away people's freedoms....the land of the free, right... except for the parts you don't like....hypocrites of the worst kind.
This is incoherent rambling. At no time in the entire history of this country, has the ability or intention to procreate ever been a requirement for marriage. That is reality.
