Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Marriage is about having children. If some people get married and don't have kids, thats fine but it doesn't change the reason for it.
|
That's one purpose, but its also a way to rebuild a support system which should come closer to providing unconditional love - once your parents are starting to get old enough to die. Two people (or as far as I'm concerned, more) can easily decide to settle down so that they have someone to count on. With no expections of having kids.
I personally favor a civil union....
for everyone. For heterosexuals
and homosexuals, let the state have a contract which grants a civil union. The happy couple can then go out and find their flavor of church or secular society that can provide an official marriage. No discrimination, no "separate but equal" / implied secondary status, everyone wins. How many heterosexual people would be willing to have a civil union instead of a marriage license?
IL - my point is that regardless of what rights you attach to child production, there are a slew of heterosexual couples who would also have to forfeit these rights. If heterosexual couples who adopt do not lose these rights, then all couples will have these rights because all couples can adopt.