http://www.lemondrop.com/2009/07/08...m/2009/07/08/woman-marries-her-dog-seriously/ This should come as no surprise. It'll start happening here soon enough and then we'll see a new spin to the health care debate, animal rights... I can't wait. I love this liberal crap. i really do.
Love the first comment made at the bottom: "big deal....i was married to a bitch for 10 years" hahaha.
It's a brave new world! You can marry anyone or anything, including your dog, your cat, your lizard, your turtle . . . All that matters is LOVE!!
Nothing wrong with marrying anyone as long as it is consensual between two adults who aren't siblings/parents/off-spring.
Because inbreeding greatly increases the risk of handicaps, defects or congenital illnesses. So it isn't harmless. I suppose marriage without reproduction could be legal, but it might be difficult to enforce the non-reproduction part.
Actually I would like for you to justify the government being involved with any sort of marriage, whatsoever. If the government wasn't involved in all this shit in the first place, it wouldnt' be a problem!
I know you want to try to compare homosexual marriage to being akin to allowing incestuous marriages (more on that in a moment) and bestiality (and probably pedophilia) but it is a very unrefined argument. Marriage between two consensual adults (minus the siblings/parents/child issue) should be perfectly fine as what happens in the privacy of ones bedroom (again between consensual adults) is really none of mine or your business. As long as no one gets killed or severely maimed I'm pretty okay wherever you want to place your genitals or do with them as long as your partner is a-okay with it. The problem with siblings/parents/children (besides the cultural taboo that is unlikely to ever, ever change in this regard) is the chances of birth defects. In an unrelated coupling between a man and a woman that results in a child the chances of a birth defect happening is 3-4 percent. However, in a sibling/parent/child coupling the chances of birth defects rises to 14-17 percent IIRC. Humorously incest is already allowed in 25 states in the form of first cousin marriages. Out of those 25 only 6 require that you be above a certain age or unable to bear children; additionally only one (Maine) requires that if you are able to bear children that you undergo genetic counseling to ensure that you will not increase the risk of a birth defect. First cousin couplings that result in children have a 5-8% chance of birth defects (up from 3-4% in unrelated couplings but down from the 14-17% of siblings/parents/children etc). So while the argument that not allowing siblings, etc to get married is a 'nice' counterargument to those who wish to allow gays to marry, it is very unrefined at best. There is a genetic reason it is not allowed (again besides the cultural taboo), and as I stated first cousin marriage is already legal in half of the United States itself (and who knows about the rest of the world).
I was busy responding to Shooter and did not see this message posted. But Minstrel answered it, and I gave my response to this in what I wrote to Shooter. The chances of birth defects in sibling/parents/off-spring relations is significantly higher than first-cousin marriages (a good ten percent higher). Besides the cultural taboo that I imagine society will never get over I also doubt they would ever get over allowing the legal conception of children under such high statistics for birth defects. It's basically the two issues clashing against eachother to form a gigantic issue.
I read it, but it doesn't answer the question. There isn't any law against two unmarried people reproducing.
I think most proponents of marriage would say that the purpose is to create a family and that having children is a part of that. Like Minstrel said marriage without reproduction could possibly be legal in this case, but there would be a hard time enforcing it. This is why currently first cousin marriage in six states (25 total) is only legal after a certain age (I assume child-bearing age) or if you are physically incapable of having children. Perhaps in the future (I imagine with our society it is not possible in our lifetime) sibling/parent/child marriages could possibly be legal under the same guidelines of those six restricted states.
