I'll take that as a WIN since you obviously don't have a cogent argument to refute mine.
I dont need a logical argument. Your statement is factually wrong.
Sure you do. Elderly couples marry for company, NOT procreation. Ergo, there
IS more than one purpose. Give up, please. Your mind is slipping out of all limits of rationality. You're becoming ridiculously easy to debunk.
People marry for a variety of reasons.
The state's interest is limited to one.
I've made this clear before.
If it were, then the benefits would come when the children did. Instead, benefits of marriage come regardless of children or the ability to have them. Nor is anyone required to be able to have children in order to marry in any state.
Why then would we exclude gays from marriage for their failure to meet a standard that doesn't exist and applies to no one?
Don't tell us....your answer is another one of those secret arguments that you can't actually articulate, describe, or use in any meaningful way? Um, Rabbi......your secret argument schtick is your tell.