Yes. Why are they there then? what is the compelling state interest? You're not arguing for the abolishment of the legal entity. What is the state interest, counselor.Gay people are not any more likely to reproduce because you don't allow them to marry. Are you arguing that homosexuals should be forced to breed in order to pump out more soldiers/taxpayers?
Two men cannot make babies.
Further, this line of argument begs the question if we should deny marriage rights to the infertile, while ignoring the fact that homosexuals CAN reproduce.
Oh... but not naturally, will be the reply as there is always some rationalized crevice that you cockroaches can crawl into.
??? Non sequitur. I don't care about baby making. That's your argument, retard, and you are clearly projecting. I care about individual liberty. If they want to make babies, okay. If they don't, okay. If they want to do it through the "natural" process, fine. If they want to use some other means, that's okay too. As long as it is their choice and does not amount to forcing their will on another, I don't fucking care.
Grasshopper, I will whip your ass no matter which way you turn. Your attacks are weak and easily countered.
Giving the cultural and reproductive unit of humanity a legal advantage is a reason for state interest. they can extend this same interested advantage to gay couples in the form of civil union. marriage is a union between a man and a woman, one each gender of POTENTIAL natural reproduction. that's really what it is, just one of each of the biologically differentiated known genders which complement each other by being able to reproduce with each other. Of course they didn't force barren couples to get divorce.
You want barren couples to be forced to be divorced. Bad you.