why didn't i know it?

[vaudevilles]

Yes. I am working from home. Why do you ask?

This is the coolest thing... As we all know, the reason gay marriage is an evil evil thing is that gay people can't have children AND PROCREATION IS THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE GET MARRIED. For yay, verily, we are but breeding units in the service of God

Comments

[raynedanser]

That has got to be the most moronic thing I have ever read - on many counts. First? What about the het couples (or any couples, but het specifically in this case) that don't WANT children? DUH. Are they going to be forced? Yes, that's a GREAT environment. Second, no divorce if there are children? At all? Ever? So hey, as long as it's a het couple with a child, who gives a shit if the father is beating the shit out of the mom and raping the kids? It's for the good of all, you know, to keep the family together so they can procreate - when they were a het couple that didn't want kids in the first place. And OMG - if I have a child by being raped, drugged, whatever at a party or walking down the street - that means I am married to the guy? Holy crap. How stupid can people be? Seriously. (and yeah, not even getting into the whole gay relationship thing. This frosts my ass enough as it is)

[vaudevilles]

I love how they are pointing out the hypocrisy of the argument of the Washington State Judiciary's decision in suggesting this. It's a perfect way to poke holes in the homophobic asshattedness that is the legal wonkwanks' "reasoning".

*hugs you*

BTW: "frosts my ass" is a FANTASTIC expression.

[raynedanser]

The whole thing is just.... wonkwanks. Love it. It's right up there with frosting my ass. (frost is interchangeable with chap, btw)

[vaudevilles]

I am so unbelievably glad to be living in a country where this isn't necessary you know?

*hugs all the Americans*

[mkcs]

No. Sorry, but however amusing this is, it reminds me way too much of those people who think the cure for the overuse of sexual images of women in advertising is banning them, not making more ads with sexual images of men. Or the ones who think that because lots of pornography is designed to appeal particularly to men, it should be banned, instead of going out there and making pornography to appeal to women.

(Admittedly, if these people were simply fighting to turn all NZ marriages into civil unions and abolish legal recognition of marriage entirely, I'd be right behind them. But that's about separation of the state from our personal lives, not about equality.)

[vaudevilles]

I see where you're coming from - but I still think this is a great way to point out the hypocrisy. Would I want the bill to pass? HELL no. I don't think the people proposing it would either, but to get dialogue and debate going in this way? I like it.

Probably because it's snarky as all hell and I do have a fondness for that.

[pensnest]

I think it's cool, too. As someone who was present at two of her father's weddings and one of her grandmother's, none of which unions produced any offspring, it's always been obvious to me that the procreation of children *isn't* a primary reason for marriage. So using that as an argument against gay marriage is a stupid argument which deserves to be pushed to its limit so that hitherto uninvolved people wake up and say, wait, what? No way!

[vaudevilles]

Pointing out what a bunch of daft apeths the Washington State Judiciary is being is brilliant. I love the snark of it.

Going to your grandmother's wedding? That must have been lovely. There's something about people who have been on this earth a long time making a commitment that big that just gets the tears flowing.

By the end of Saturday I will have been to five weddings in four weeks, two bi girl/boy couples (who don't want children), two straight couples (who already have children), and one queer girl couple (who are planning to have children). So, the only people who are wedding because of the children are the queer girl couple. Seems fair to me.