Exactly, it was about children, but for property rights. It was social contract, women were once considered possessions in most societies, they had dowries to entice good husbands, biology was secondary.
Maybe secondary but still elemental. Gay lovers werent considered property or have dowries to entice good husbands. Because
"matrimonium is an institution involving a mother, mater. The idea implicit in the word is that a man takes a woman in marriage, in matrimonium ducere, so that he may have children by her."
Yes, the old fashioned notions of the different roles to be played by men and women, no longer have any applicability in modern society. But the limitation of only men becoming fathers by turning a woman into a mother, isnt old fashioned notions of the differing roles of men and women but is intead the differing biological roles of men and women in procreation.
§ 160.204. PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY.
(a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) he is married to the mother of the child and the child is born during the marriage;....
just as it was, thousands of years ago in BC Rome
Mater semper certa est ("The mother is always certain")
"pater semper incertus est" ("The father is always uncertain")
"pater est, quem nuptiae demonstrant" ("father is to whom marriage points")
