But it's only a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of real marriage.
Different. Very different.
Real marriage is sacred. And scientific.
Ss couples are simply pretending. Even a child knows that, because they are NEVER mom and dad, are they.
'YOUR' views? Seriously.
The denial of the relational reality I accurately stated is as silly as your attempt to frame marriage solely in a legal parameter on a religious forum.
I'm not restrained from viewing the breadth of marriage on this discussion forum. Your attempt to do so only exposes your inability to defend your position if all factors are included. And we certainly are not standing before the SCOTUS.
You are a perfect example of the inability of a homosexual to equate to the full dimension of marriage.
'You' are discussing a narrow aspect of marriage to manipulate the outcome.<quoted text>
We are discussing CIVIL and LEGAL Marriage, not religious matrimony.
Again, if Marriage is "sacred" then under the Laws of this Nation Government has no business in it. "Sacred" matrimony is the concern of sectarian religious bodies, and effect those who subscribe to those sects, not others.
Legally, by Grandfathering, sectarian religionist matrimony is recognized as satisfying the Legal requirements of the Civil Marriage contract as long as certain very basic forms are observed. This does not mean that sectarian religionist bodies are entitled to dictate terms to Civil Government regarding access to or exclusion from Civil Marriage. On the contrary, Civil Government determines who may act in the position of Official Witness for the State (Officiant) to the public verbal expression of Informed Consent to Marriage Contract by the parties to the Contract. Further, demonstration of satisfaction of the Legal requirements for a Marriage License must be made by the applying Parties to the CIVIL authorities, not any sectarian religious person and, upon such demonstration may Marry pretty much anywhere, and with any eligible Officiant they so choose. It is the Civil Government that authorizes the CIVIL marriage, whether Officiated by a CIVIL authority or a sectarian religionist shaman of some stripe ... NOT the other way around.
Apart from Social Scientists (I are one, crosspatch) studying it, how is "marriage" itself "scientific"?
Make it march.
(You really need to learn the difference between your imagined models that help you make your own sense of things, and reality; especially the reality of those perspectives specific to disciplines which are not yours; e.g. Law and the Social Sciences. Incorrectly bandying terms which have definitions specific to those disciplines does not mean you are truly conversant in the concepts specific to those perspectives. From your mouth they play like buzzwords.)
I annoy you because I bring up things you would try to restrict in a court room.'Sorry', this is not a court room.
In this setting, being sensitive to cultural and religious constricts is a sign of civilization.
As to scientific, I have repeatedly pointed out that AT IT'S MOST BASIC ESSENCE, marriage is cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. Ss couples are a defective failure of evolutionary mating behavior. That is basic evolutionary science, and you know it.