No, the whole reason for this argument is to correct you. No one said procreation is a requirement for marriage.<quoted text>
You just implied that was the case, I am happy to correct you.
Procreation has no place in a discussion about the legal right to marry
Yet you insist someone did. I have said (and I stand by it) that procreation is closely related to marriage and why argue otherwise? Any freshman sociology student knows that. And it's one of the reasons the government gives perks to marriage. Why argue otherwise? What is the goal of your spin? Of course procreation is associated with marriage. Of course it's never been a REQUIREMENT.