Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Yes it is, its all about reproduction. The population of the western world is NOT exploding, its in fact shrinking unless they allow immigration in great numbers. I always find people not having kids and using this exploding population argument as the best secondary reason in the world, they have the real reason they don't want kids, and then the 'oh the worlds population is exploding' myth to sound good about it.
|
Ustwo, I'm not entirely following what you're saying here - somehow I get the feeling you posted this in a hurry - but if I'm understanding correctly, you're saying that claims of increasing population are a secondary rationalization for support of lifestyles that do not further reproduction. I feel pretty confident that the world's population, taken in whole, is in fact increasing and will continue to do so, barring disease, war, famine - you know, the four horses and all that. Yep, I know we're being out-fucked by the rest of the world - but gay mariage might very likely result in increased adoption rates. Gay people already are in the "not making babies" region, and I don' t see how not letting them get married is going to significantly make them start magically making babies.
My point is that encouraging reproduction isn't the
sole purpose of marriage-related benefits. I am under the impression that many of these benefits are practical in nature - such as making medical decisions, or filing joint tax claims, etc. This has been discussed across the boards, and even in other places, to the extent that I don't see much point in belaboring the point. I think the entire question of equating marital status and the rights therein to the question of encouraging reproduction to be a secondary rationalization. At the end of the day, I agree that this shouldn't be a big deal - I just don't see why that defaults to denying gay people the right to marriage. Particularly if the estimates of fraction of our population is something like 5-10%, who cares?