C'mon XBox, use your head for something other than a hat rack. Remove the sexual procreative aspect of the marital relationship, and what else is there to generate a compelling state interest? Why prohibit blood relatives from marrying? Its because they might have sex, and make a baby, named Xavier Breath....just kidding.<quoted text>
You think it is the only reason????
That reason was made long before you, or I were born. Do you think its a fluke that SSM never, other than a few scattered historical examples, existed before in the West, or around the globe for that matter?Well ain't it just too bad that YOU don't get to make that determination for the State?
Scientifically proven on untold numerous studies conducted on husbands AND wives. There's not sufficient numbers or studies to conclusively prove such studies are applicable to SSM, male or female. If a study shows that married men live longer because of their wife, would that study be applicable to a female SSC? Male SSC? What about plural marriage? If what you are saying is true, there's no reason not to allow that. It would benefit plural marriage practioners too.There are many other reasons: longer life, better health, reduced crime, and it promotes financial independence. And these SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN benefits occur whether or not there are children involved.