No, Wondering, it has not. If it had, there would not be multiple cases being reviewed by state courts, federal courts, appellate courts, and the US Supreme Court. So, this issue has very much NOT been settled as a matter of law.Gay marriage has also been settled as a matter of law.
Of course, I understand, you dunce. It has been my argument this entire time that the law needs to change because laws restricting same sex couples from marrying unlawfully infringe upon the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. Similarly, the US Congress, having not been delegated the authority to regulate marriage by the US Constitution, overstepped its bounds in drafting the DOMA. Ergo, the right to regulate marriage belongs to the states, who are constitutionally mandated to provide all persons within their jurisdiction (good news, this includes dullards, like yourself) equal protection of the laws.Gays don't like it so they are attempting to have the law changed or removed. You do understand that laws change, don't you?
No, that merely illustrates that you are not very intelligent. People are regularly allowed to marry who have no intention, or no ability to become pregnant.As for the relevance, yes, it is relevant. Two US citizens, same sex, seeking the same rights. No chance of producing children making the birth defect argument a non-issue.
Procreation or procreative ability are neither a prerequisite for, nor a requirement of legal marriage. Your argument is so much hot air. What is more, it is demonstrably false.