Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
- Thread starter
- #41
The same reason used by the millions of straight couples that get married and never have children.
You can't get around the fact that no one is required to have children or be able to have them to be married. Why then would we apply a non-existent standard....and then only to gays?
There has always been the standard of man/woman marriage. It is a standard that is as old as human civilization. Your johnny-come-lately gay-lifestyle marriage is the one that has to "prove up".
And it cannot. It cannot ever provide the complimentary genders necessary for children's best formation. It cannot ever provide both blood parents in a home either. Man/woman can provide the complimentary genders. It doesn't matter if they have/adopt kids or not. The state is not in the business of policing its ideal, only in setting it. Men and women together have this very reliable little habit of getting pregnant. The state merely assumes most of them will. And indeed this is the case. So "man/woman" is not defiled by childless couples. Moreover, those childless man/woman couples often wind up adopting. And as such, provide the man/woman complimentary genders children need to thrive the best from their role modeling later in life.
So with children, without children, the gold standard is the same: man/woman. The state relies on the penchant of that arrangement to overwhelmingly produce or adopt children. And so it is the case. No policing necessary. Those that fall short do not ruin the standard that is best for all kids.