[Vision2020] Same sex marriage

[Kenneth Marcy]

On 7/15/2012 4:37 AM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
> Sorry, Ken, but that is one of the silliest arguments I have heard. 
> Marriage has nothing to do with if people have children or not.

Marriage has to do with, among other things, with whether people have 
social permission to procreate. Same-sex marriage implies such 
permission is not granted to individuals within that relationship.

> You can be married and have no children and be not married and have 10 
> children.

Of course. Physical biology is not prevented by marriage or its absence.

> Many same sex couples can, do, will, and want to have children, and 
> make damn good parents too.

Likewise true.

> It is actually easier to have more children if you are NOT in a 
> monogamous relationship for both genders.

If a person lacks a spouse who would disapprove of extramarital 
sexuality, and if that person cares not whether pregnancy results from 
personal sexual activity, then more children may result.

> A man is more able to impregnate more women, and a woman would be more 
> likely to get pregnant with more men.

Marriage may have a counter-intuitive prophylactic effect as a result of 
each partner encouraging more responsibility from the other without 
regard to partner gender.

More irresponsible, less thoughtful, people may cause more pregnancies 
without regard to partner gender if they are not monogamous. If they are 
monogamous fewer pregnancies will result within same-sex couples, 
whether or not they are married.

> People should not, or be socially engineered to marry a person of a 
> gender they are not attracted to, that is unfair to one or both of them.

I am not suggesting unwanted marriage. Remaining single is just as 
available an option.

> As well as others that could be deprived of their true affections 
> and love.
> Marriage should ALWAYS be about two consenting adults who love each other.

How romantic. And in many cases, how unrealistic. Over the centuries 
marriage has more often been an arrangement implementing social 
practicalities rather than love. Given the intractable societal burdens 
of overpopulation, societal concerns may well trump personal preferences 
for multiple reasons -- food sharing, housing sharing, and many facets 
of more efficient societal use of many limited resources.

> And nothing else. People deserve nothing less.

Whether or not our current mixture of preferences will survive 
increasing population pressures is both uncertain and unlikely.


Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120715/02bd4ff0/attachment.html>