While very poetic, simply wrong on so many levels.KiMare wrote:
Child, most couples don't have property when they get married.
Why would you 'require' procreation when marriages need protection NOT to procreate.
On the other hand, ss couples could never procreate if it was a requirement anyway. In fact, gay couples need protection just to have intercourse!
However, its not just that normally marriages procreate and ss couples NEVER mutually procreate, its that a union of 'Mars & Venus' is vastly distinct from the collision of Uranus and Uranus.
Ss couples are incapable of measuring up to marriage at any level of comparison, making ss marriage an oxymoron.
I understand that you are trying to denigrate all marriages today by presenting an ancient, false impression that marriages at one time were all about 'property'.
Here is a start of how marriage is vastly distinct from ss couples;
Marriage is a miraculous union of two genders,
a union so profound,
it is described as the union of Mars and Venus.
It reunites humanity to the roots of life,
while at the very same time
hosting the best and natural
birth place of future human life.
It is the blend of masculinity and femininity.
The wisdom of logic and intuition united.
Strength and delicacy perfectly balanced.
Protection and nurture combined as one.
A complimentary merging that multiplies the unbiased blend of humanity's genders.
Distinctions a ss couple can never match.
You again go back to it is the best way to raise children - irrelevant for marriage.
Then you add the "blending" - again irrelevant for marriage.
Marriage is a legal contract that creates a family unit where one does not already exist.
How are same sex couples unable to live up to the definition?