What difference does it make? Why should someone be so stupid that they can't understand that your preference aren't always what matters? Other people have different priorities.
Different purposes. To what end? What are these purposes?
To perpetuate petty repression? To continue to make others unworthy? To make those different from you feel less than they are?
Why? What good comes of all that fear and hate?
We live in a society and, occasionally, folks will have to interact with each other.
And all that ignorance, suspicion and fear is accomplishing what goal? What is the benefit of being nothing other than a self righteous bully?
and don't forget child creation
That's kinda important
And consequently you'll advocate that infertile opposite-sex couples be prohibited from marrying as well.
Oh, quite the opposite. They belong to a demographic that has supplied every human being that ever walked the face of the earth, cuz only opposite gender couples are required.
That means, every.......
Cop
Firefighter
Teacher
Accountant
Lawyer
Plumber
Nurse
Doctor
AND
Everyone else
Are the product of opposite gender coupling.
Oh, and not one was ever produced by a same sex coupling.
Is procreation a prerequisite for a marriage license?
No, it is not.
Which is why the 'procreation argument' used by those hostile to the equal protection rights of same-sex couples fails.
Indeed, all the arguments used by those hostile to the equal protection rights of same-sex couples fail, which is why the courts have invalidated measures seeking to deny gay Americans their 14th Amendment rights.
The 'tradition' argument fails, see
Lawrence v. Texas.
The 'polygamist' argument fails as a slippery slope fallacy, as marriage law can accommodate only two persons, same- or opposite-sex.
The 'redefining marriage' argument fails, as recognizing the right of same-sex couples to access marriage law in no way 'changes' marriage, because same-sex couples are currently eligible to enter into marriage contracts, marriage unaltered and not 'redefined.'
The 'religious marriage' argument fails, as the 14th Amendment jurisprudence requiring the states to allow same-sex couples to marry applies solely to government, not private persons or organizations, such as churches.
The 'civil unions' argument fails, as separate but equal is just as repugnant to the Constitution as seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law they're eligible to participate in.
In fact, there is no rational basis in support of denying same-sex couples to marry, it is devoid of objective, documented evidence is support, and it pursues no proper legislative end – measures seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law are motivated solely by animus toward gay Americans, only to make gay Americans different from everyone else; this the states cannot do. A state cannot so deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws, including marriage law.