Using your logic, an incestuous marriage should be legal because it can produce offspring. So can plural marriages. So can a marriage between a 50 year old man and a 13 year old girl.<quoted text>
Well VV, at least you shifted from your ad homoan attacks back to silly stupid logic.
You attempt to equate a direct, absolute desolate sterility to those rare heterosexual genetic or accidental exceptions.
Or even sillier, the consequence of age! I suppose you expect married couples to get divorced when they can no longer procreate too?
But the stupidest 'reasoning' is a couple who is fully capable of mutual procreation, choosing not to (for the time being, an option that usually changes) with a ss couple who is absolutely mutually desolate.
By your reasoning, any relationship qualifies for marriage. Moreover, marriage is so dumbed down, we might as well eliminate the term as meaningless.
The bottom line is that my analogy already exposed the silliness of your claim.
The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;
An apple tree bearing fruit.
An apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
An walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
An walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.
The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too!
But, hey, you're the one who keeps claiming that any couples who do not reproduce "are a direct defect of mating behavior. Hence, they do not 'equate' to marriage at the fundamental level."
Your words, not mine...
And I will not respond to your apple tree/walnut tree crap until you can make your point clear. Is the non-producing apple tree supposed to represent something? Is the non-producing walnut tree supposed to represent something? Is the walnut tree that ridiculously walks about gathering apples to hang on its branches supposed to represent something?
You're going to have to have to step outside of your asinine analogy and explain it to the rest of us.
You realize that if no on understands your analogy, it doesn't make you a genius don't you? It just means you suck at analogies.