Source: Northwest Cable News
The mind boggles …
That shouldn’t be much of a problem. I’d wager a guess that in at least half the cases, an offspring is forthcoming within less than 9 months of a wedding.
snerk… ok, just funny. Both of my siblings got married under these circumstances. My wife and I tried for over 9 years, so I think this would suck tremendously.
I doubt the people behind this actually want it to happen. It’s just a way to remove the “but same-sex couples can’t have kids!” argument against gay marriage.
It’s a really bad way of doing it, though. Even I know that the only thing that’ll happen is what’s said in the final part; those against will just take it as “evidence” that those gosh darned gays are trying to destroy marriage.
I don’t think those pushing for it are serious about it. They’re just trying to prove a point–which is that, regardless of what homophobic people say, marriage is about more than just procreation.
I read the whole article. It’s actually a tool to get the dialogue moving. Silly, yes. But not as silly as limiting marriage to het couples.
Sweet! Does this mean I can start picking out someone new without the agony of going through a divorce?
Here is the link to the organization’s website, and yes they think it is an absurd idea as well. This all stems from that a few years back Washington State passed a Defence of Marriage Ace (DOMA) which in spirit, was a means to outlaw gay marriage and was worded to say that marriage should only be for the creation of children. So, this group is basically saying that if the DOMA is correct, then there should be ramifications in the law to be married and not having children.
This is actually the first of three initiatives they are going to float:
None of them are serious in that they would actually pass, but they are there to encourage debate, show how goofy the current law is, and potentially be a vehicle to bring a case involving gay marriage rights to the state supreme court.
I can see the line of questioning now:
Dole Office Clerk: Married?
Comicus: Yes.
Dole Office Clerk: Oh, a breeder!
Comicus: Hmmmmmm…
Dole Office Clerk: Did you breed last week?
Comicus: No.
Dole Office Clerk: Did you try to breed last week?
Comicus: Yes!
Oh, I know that, just as I know it won’t pass. But then again, this country elected Bush as president. Twice.
On the plus side, you wouldn’t have to worry about your mother marrying some guy she met at the senior’s club on Bingo night and him getting all your inherietence.
Unless they had kids.
I think you miscounted.
Oh.
Oh, damn.
Well, that would have been weird anyway…
I thought the OP was “Have Your Kids or Marriage Annulled”.
Call me old fashioned, but I think public proposal of an initiative one isn’t serious about is terrible, no matter whose side it comes from. Also, I would generally expect the childishly short-sighted “you want this? fine, we’ll do this, so there” logistics attack attitude more from people like GWB (except those assholes from Truth, though I shouldn’t make assumptions about their political leanings). So, I wasn’t amused and I think there’s prenty of opportunity for dialogue on the subject otherwise (ftr, I support gay marriage). Sorry if I’m a party pooper.
According to their website, they seriously want it passed: “By getting the initiatives passed, we hope the Supreme Court will strike them down as unconstitutional and thus weaken Andersen itself.”
If I could vote for them I would. I think it’s a great idea.
Right. Three times.
I haven’t read the article but what does it mean for people who want to get married but don’t want to have kids? Will they be forced to have kids and then give them up for adoption, or is it a sneaky way of saying “it’s ok, you’ll love them when they arrive”?
The whole idea is to take the notion that “homosexuals can’t get married because they can’t have biological kids with each other” and give it an extra twist:
“OK, anybody who can’t have biological kids with each other or don’t wanna can’t get married”
By having this second notion striked down as completely dumb, the proponents are hoping that people will realize how dumb the first notion is.