I know that a walnut tree normally bears walnuts. In this analogy though, like gay couples, it NEVER bears fruit. Heterosexual couples (Apple trees) most often do.<quoted text>
The fact you think you've made an apt analogy.
For one reason, walnut trees DO bear fruit, because nuts are fruits.
But even if they weren't, the ability to bear fruit is part of the definition of a fruit tree. But the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of a marriage.
Are you so stupid because your brain is made from tissue with two different types of DNA, and it just doesn't work properly?
Again, stupid, the ability to bear apples is part of the definition of an apple tree, in fact, that's pretty much it, but the ability to have kids isn't part of the definition of marriage.
Gay couples want the fruit of a heterosexual couples (apples) so they can pretend they are just like apple trees; married and families. This is in the silly belief that other people won't notice they are barren walnut trees with apples stuck on them.
According to SCOTUS, the reason for government protection and provision of marriage is exactly because they are the natural and best source of human fruit.
Gay couples are simply one of numerous forms of friendships. If they can be equated to marriage, so can any friendship.
According to Evolution, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a desolate defect of the fundamental purpose of evolution.
It is clear that on any level considered, gay couples and marriage are vastly distinct.