Okay, if you’re gonna ignore the bigger argument and nit pick me, I’ll nit pick you and the author.
First, it’s absurd to say that the pill “severed” the relationship between marriage and procreation. At best, you can say it eroded it a little, but did not sever. There is still a whole lot of married procreating going on out there.
Second, the sub title of the article is “The Pill made same sex nuptials inevitable” is a provocative assumption, but one he cannot support except around the edges. What about condoms. What about the sponge. What about allowing infertile people to get married. What about diaphragms.
The pill is different from all of those situations, but they all prevent pregnancy as well. And the author doesn’t ever touch on that sufficiently...because to do so would weaken his dot connection.
There is also a lot of historical realities that are simply ignored...the idea that a wedding gave a man and woman permission to have sex and procreate is a gross generalization, given that the implication is that societies have never given such permission without a wedding.
And finally, you made a big deal about the pill and it being a chemical potion that killed a child. That’s a valid argument, but not one the article ever mentions. That’s a totally separate discussion. I bet you jumped into this debate based on that fact, and don’t even realize the article never even goes there. That’s why I said it’s irrelevant, and no doubt why you assumed I was pro pill. You stepped in heep big doodoo there buddy roe.
Do you mean like Sarah or Hannah ?
False; given that the implication is that Christians have never given such permission without a wedding, but if you are not a Christian I could understand that error.
There is still a whole lot of married procreating going on out there.
In the 19th Century the US birth rates were much higher, perhaps 7 live births, while in the 20th Century it fell to about 2. Coincidentally, people learned to use more artificial means to prevent pregnancy, culminating with the potions (drugs) that are available now. The institution of marriage within the US has fallen, and has been extended to homosexual couples since the don't want to be alone, and their primary purpose is pleasure rather than procreation, not unlike their heterosexual countrymen who hold the same view.