This quote is from another question about gay marriage, one of the answers: "Only when that party of 2 can procreate, without outside influence. That is the intent of marriage."
So what if a heterosexual couple gets married but has fertility problems? What if they choose not to have children? What if they adopt instead? If adoption is OK for heterosexual couples, what about gay couples who adopt?
2006-10-19 10:44:51 · 12 answers · asked by angk 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
yeppers: Lots of gay couples adopt. From what I've seen, it's easier most places for a gay couple to adopt than for a single person.
2006-10-19 10:52:55 · update #1
I think you already know the answer to this; of course marriage is more than just having babies.
2006-10-19 10:47:14 · answer #1 · answered by daisyk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those who ignorantly say that the only acceptable purpose of marriage is procreation are not thinking it through. Humans marry for a variety of reasons--because it's what society expects or what their families expect, because they don't like to be alone, because they want to have children, so they can combine their economic resources for a better life, etc. Spouses are life-companions and helpmates, not just breeders.
Sex doesn't equal only procreation either. Sometimes people have sex because they want to have babies. More often, though, they do it because it feels good and allows them to feel close and intimate with one another.
Marriage isn't for everyone. I personally love it, and I'd like to see more couples, both hetero- and homosexual, marry and grow deliriously happy together.
2006-10-19 10:53:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Here's my opinion.
The government subsidizes marriage because it makes babies. Sorry, but if you're gay you don't. Yes, there are heterosexual couples who don't have children. But that is not the norm. You can't make laws based on each unique circumstance. I mean, there are people who are not really mature enough to drink at 21, and there are people who are at 16. But 21 is a norm, so that's the law.
As far as adoption goes, I don't see a problem with gay couples adopting. However, in some peoples' mind there is a difference because they feel children benefit from having a male and a female influence in different ways and they are suffering if they don't have both.
2006-10-19 10:49:39 · answer #3 · answered by Hopeful Poster 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
conversing of guy and spouse, the 1st point out of human reproduction/procreation is in Genesis a million:28 the place it says, "Be fruitful and multiply, and refill the earth, and subdue it: and characteristic dominion . . . ." The linked household projects are sparkling. enticing in intercourse with the reason to reproduce/procreate might desire to be below here circumstances: "fruitful", earnings that would sustain; "refill", a house for a kinfolk; "subdue", to provide up whilst it extremely is adequate; "dominion", the aptitude to administration materials. If a guy and spouse would not have sufficient materials and earnings to take care of a kinfolk and be on their own, the least they might do is to "subdue" -- the two one among them is adequate. there is not any factor doing all once you're amiss even in one. greater effective be a fulfillment in one than a failure in all or many. greater effective be a fulfillment as a guy and spouse than be a failure as a kinfolk. in this context, being guy and spouse, intercourse without the reason of reproduction/procreation isn't a sin?
2016-11-23 19:55:01 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The intent of sex is procreation, not the sole intent of marriage. We marry to create a union, we are come together and no man can separate us.
If marriage means so little to gay couples, if it means only procreation, then why do they so desperately seek to get married?
2006-10-19 10:58:59 · answer #5 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Marriage has nothing to do with procreation. You can procreate without marriage and you can be married without procreation. To link the two shows immaturity
2006-10-19 10:50:18 · answer #6 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Procreation is the intent of sex not marriage. Marriage is a binding, legal and spiritual contract between two people.
2006-10-19 10:48:27 · answer #7 · answered by PaganPoetess 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know where that member got that idea from, he is wrong.
The Bible doesn't give that as a requirement for marriage and it's not the only reason to get married. The Bible does say that homosexuality is unnatural and shameful.
2006-10-19 11:06:21 · answer #8 · answered by bobcwebb 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The purpose of marriage is procreative and unitive. Not, solely procreative and not solely unitive. A married couple must be open to the possibility of children. God can do it naturally with people who were previously barren: Rachel, Sarah, Anne and Samson's mother.
2006-10-19 10:52:38 · answer #9 · answered by Patrick S 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the purpose of marriage is for 2 people that love each other to be bound together in spirit and life in the eyes of their god/gods.
in the event of an athiest to be legally bound in the eyes of their government.
2006-10-19 11:02:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋