No Marriage Without Procreation
This is the most awesome stunt ever! I wish I still lived in Seattle so I could write about it for The Stranger.
The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance (WA-DOMA) announced on Thursday that their proposed initiative to make procreation a requirement for legal marriage has been accepted by the Secretary of State and assigned the serial number 957.
That’s right anti-gay marriage types (and the passive majority who keeps voting for states’ anti-gay marriage bans). So if you want to keep saying that marriage is important because it produces children and that because gays can’t produce children they shouldn't be allowed to marry than its time to put your money where your big fat mouth is. No marriage for anyone who can’t or won’t produce children.
Yes it’s a stunt. But it’s a good one. It targets the bullshit right back squarely at the people who want to get upset about gays by using some cockamamie argument against gay marriage. (For the record, I don’t believe it’s possible to be accepting of gays but against gay marriage. I suspect anyone who is really against gay marriage is really just uncomfortable with gayness in general.)
Hat tip Feministing.
Posts
2 comments:
Yawn. This is the cowardly way out. It creates a straw man in supposing the opposition to gay marriage is based soley on inability to procreate, which it is not. Also, why play games? If someone is for gay "marriage," why not make the argument based on what is believed? The answer: The majority of Americans don't support gay "marriage," and groups that pull stunts like this know that.
Jim in Cleveland, OH
Why do you think it's a stunt?
The purpose of marriage is to form families. The lifelong and intrinsically complementary union of husband and wife provides the foundation.
It just makes sense that couples who willfully refuse to form families should have no claim on the benefits of marriage.
Certainly makes more sense than pretending to change the definition of marriage.
Post a Comment