Then divorce. In CA, you can divorce for any, or no reason, really.(Irreconcilable differences)<quoted text>
Dig a little deeper, explore marital case law, even divorce law, which failure to consumate can be grounds for divorce.
Not a good reason to deny people equal rights.
You don't have to be able to reproduce in order to marry. And if fatherhood is an issue, get a DNA test.Simple biology, sometimes, nine months later little nhjeff is born. You do know where babies come from, don't you? Ohhhhhhh...so that's it....Dad never had "the talk" with you. Perhaps its not too late. Or maybe you do know, but can't understand why you're not pregnant yet. Then you definately need to have "the talk".
No. But so what?Hmmmmmmm...the concept is "presumption of paternity". Say one half of a lesbian couple, at an office party, finds herself strangely attracted to a male coworker and friend. She and he, become "better aquainted", so to speak. Before ya know it, she finds herself in a family way. Assuming she maintains the pregnancy to term, and decides to keep the child, do you think that anyone will presume her female partner is the father?
That's not a good reason to deny people equal rights.
Who knows? Who cares? Let them work it out. That's why lawyers were invented.Suppose the father want to assert paternal rights? Would that trump, her female partner's "parenthood" claim?
Not a good reason to deny everybody equal rights.
For some people. Many people who can't or don't want to procreate marry.I'm going to go out on a limb here, and suggest that sex, and the possible result, conception, is at the top of the list, and quite possibly the sole legitimate reason why its prohibited. Now if same sex siblings were to seek marriage recognition, or at least all those 1000 plus benefits, that the nice gay couples want, there'd be no reason to deny them based on sex.
Praise the Lord, finally some sanity. I see you had "the talk". Very good. Its refreshing to see someone on the proSSM side recognize that procreation and marriage are linked.
It's not a requirement.
Equal rights.Seriously, "It is simply not a requirement."? What legally, culturally, religiously, etc.? Considering that marriage since the dawn of time has been virtually an exclusive male female relationship, would there really be a need for any society to "require" procreation for marriage? Just so that in the year 2001 plus, in the United States of America, some folks could try to justify same sex marriage?
Pretty simple, really.