Silly Washington Amendment

so, this group out in Washington state has drafted an amendment that lots of bloggers are discussing. The amendment would require a marriage to procreate within three years to be a valid marriage, and their intent is to point out that traditional marriage defenders are wrong when they claim that marriage requires procreation. Which of course no one has ever claimed. Marriage grants the right to conceive, it doesn't require it. This right to conceive, or really the right to do things that might result in conception, lasts the duration of the marriage, whether they use it or not. The couple cannot be prohibited from conceiving. Same-sex couples should not be granted the right to conceive. Silly proposals like this expend lots of energy, and these silly arguments would go away if traditional marriage defenders used this argument.

1 comment:

Ryan Charisma said...

First off let me say that you're an ass. Then I'll get to the point.


Sadly, you're mistaken. This "silly" bill is to force the anti-gay marriage people to live up to thier excuses for not allowing gays to marry. Their defense is "marriage is an institution for the purpose of raising children." So, therefore if gays can't have children, then gays shouldn't need to be married. Which is absolutely a load of bullshit. So this bill was introduced to force the anti-ssm nutbags to see how their reasoning works. If marriage is exclusively for the raising of children, then if you don't have children, you don't need to be married. I applaude it. I don't agree with it, but if one wants to hold back an entire community from marriage with that excuse, then they should be held to thier OWN standards.