Mandatory pregnancy proposal
and not from who you'd expect!
This is devilishly funny: in Washington State, proponents of same-sex marriage are collecting signatures on a petition to introduce a ballot measure that would require hetero couples to have kids within the first 3 years of marriage:
"The measure would require couples to prove they can have children to get a marriage license. Couples who do not have children within three years could have their marriages annulled. All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized," making those couples ineligible for marriage benefits."
The measure is meant to target social conservatives who bitch and moan that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't "procreate". The so-con nitwits never clarify what they'd do about people like my ex and I, coupled for 13 years with absolutely no intention of having kids. But obviously if the "procreation" argument against gay marriage stands, then it should stand equally for childless hetero marriages.
Naturally the so-con wingnuts are backpedaling like crazy on their claim that marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation. The whole ballot measure routine is likely just a publicity stunt, but it points out the glaring flaws in the "procreation" argument against SSM. Sooner or later they'll just have to admit what most of us already know; the real reason they oppose SSM is because they're shit-eating, bigoted swine.
This is devilishly funny: in Washington State, proponents of same-sex marriage are collecting signatures on a petition to introduce a ballot measure that would require hetero couples to have kids within the first 3 years of marriage:
"The measure would require couples to prove they can have children to get a marriage license. Couples who do not have children within three years could have their marriages annulled. All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized," making those couples ineligible for marriage benefits."
The measure is meant to target social conservatives who bitch and moan that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't "procreate". The so-con nitwits never clarify what they'd do about people like my ex and I, coupled for 13 years with absolutely no intention of having kids. But obviously if the "procreation" argument against gay marriage stands, then it should stand equally for childless hetero marriages.
Naturally the so-con wingnuts are backpedaling like crazy on their claim that marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation. The whole ballot measure routine is likely just a publicity stunt, but it points out the glaring flaws in the "procreation" argument against SSM. Sooner or later they'll just have to admit what most of us already know; the real reason they oppose SSM is because they're shit-eating, bigoted swine.
|