featherynscale (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
featherynscale) wrote2005-03-14 05:54 pm
featherynscale) wrote2005-03-14 05:54 pm
Entry tags:
Take California
Judge rules against gay marriage ban.
Now the interesting part of this article, to me, anyway, is the bit down at the very, very end... it could be my first sighting of an argument against gay marriage that is not based in the Christian religion. Let's take a look, shall we?
Two groups opposed to gay marriage rights, The Campaign for California Families and the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund, argued that the state has a legitimate interest in restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples as a way of encouraging procreation.
OK. Let's forget for a moment that forbidding same-sex couples to marry does not necessarily in any way encourage the individuals involved to procreate. That's not important right now. This is the question I'm interested in: Is it in the state's interest to encourage procreation in the first place?
Discuss.
Now the interesting part of this article, to me, anyway, is the bit down at the very, very end... it could be my first sighting of an argument against gay marriage that is not based in the Christian religion. Let's take a look, shall we?
Two groups opposed to gay marriage rights, The Campaign for California Families and the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund, argued that the state has a legitimate interest in restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples as a way of encouraging procreation.
OK. Let's forget for a moment that forbidding same-sex couples to marry does not necessarily in any way encourage the individuals involved to procreate. That's not important right now. This is the question I'm interested in: Is it in the state's interest to encourage procreation in the first place?
Discuss.