Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: youknow
The "test" for marriage should be can, not will, but can, it result in off-spring from the union of the principle partners. If the answer is no, it's a civil contract, nothing more.
5 posted on 07/11/2003 11:54:31 AM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: elbucko
So if someone's sterile, without possibility of conception, say, with a hysterectomy, then they can't get married?

I think you ought to think things through a little harder first.
7 posted on 07/11/2003 11:55:45 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (NO MULLIGANS- BILL SIMON, KEEP OUT OF THE RECALL ELECTION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: elbucko
So are you saying that people who are known to be biologically infertile (low sperm count, problem with the ovaries) should not be allowed to enter a marriage?
8 posted on 07/11/2003 11:56:37 AM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: elbucko
The "test" for marriage should be can, not will, but can, it result in off-spring from the union of the principle partners.

Agreed. The purpose of marriage is to procreate and legitimize the issue. It is silly to pretend that recreation equals procreation.

14 posted on 07/11/2003 12:00:30 PM PDT by harrowup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: elbucko
The "test" for marriage should be can, not will, but can, it result in off-spring from the union of the principle partners.

Well-meant attempts like this are usually the result of someone trying to say "We should ban homosexual marriage" without actually using the word "homosexual". The fact is it's difficult to get that point across without using language that will upset some people. Here's the way to do it:

We should ban homosexual marriage.

17 posted on 07/11/2003 12:03:08 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: elbucko
"The "test" for marriage should be can, not will, but can, it result in off-spring from the union of the principle partners. If the answer is no, it's a civil contract, nothing more."

And how would we know that? Perhaps a couple should have to be one where the woman is already pregnant before marriage.

What about older men and women? What about a young couple where one person knows he/she is infertile?

18 posted on 07/11/2003 12:04:18 PM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: elbucko
So by your logic, my wife and I could not get married three years ago, since we were both sterilized.

I guess your logic would also ban post-menopausal women from getting married.

I really don't want to have reversal surgery just to meet this test. I had complications from the initial surgery and needed a second operation. Still hurts to think about it.
27 posted on 07/11/2003 12:40:37 PM PDT by You Dirty Rats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson