Wish I could comment on FamilyScholars

FamilyScholars.org has blocked me from commenting at their site, so I'll respond to Fannie's post here, and email them to ask them to respond. I suspect they will ignore my argument, we'll see.

Anyhow, Fannie makes the same old procreation/infertility argument as if I hadn't debunked it a hundred times:

This past weekend, a relatively of mine got married for the fourth time. She is in her mid-50s and has had a hysterectomy.

There will never be a link between procreation and marriage in her marriage. Just like every same-sex couple.

She gets to legally marry her chosen partner because she and her partner have the “correct” sex composition- male and female- and not because they have the ability or potential to procreate together.
Fannie, she is ALLOWED to reproduce with her chosen partner because they have complementary sex cells (and aren't already married, under 18, or related by a prohibited relationship). They aren't required to procreate, they are ALLOWED to procreate. All marriages should always be allowed to procreate using their own genes. No one should be allowed to procreate with someone of the same sex.

It shouldn't be hard to remember this simple argument, that same-sex couples should not have the equal right to procreate that a married man and woman have.


Anonymous said...

So...any actual new research more recent than seven or eight years ago?

John Howard said...

Billions more dollars have been spent on research, but the experts have backed off their predictions of "three to five years" that the experts were making about five or six years ago. Kind of shows that they don't know what they are doing. One team just got eggs to mature from ovarian stem cells (though that doesn't seem all that challenging or groundbreaking) and are asking for permission to fertilize them and let them grow for 14 days.

Anonymous said...

Johnny "dear" Same Sex Procreation technology ALREADY exists!! just a matter of time before it becomes COMMONPLACE! Chow. MH.