July 27, 2006

Say What?!

"Marriage is not about love. It’s about a love that can bear children."


This quote, featured in the Verbatim column in this weeks Time Magazine was attributed to Todd Akin, a congressman from Missouri, who was calling for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in the U.S.

Sounds like an endorsement for a loveless marriage, or polygamy, or divorce. Wife infertile? Take another wife. Husband shooting blanks? Divorce him and find someone else.

The man of your dreams has had a vasectomy? Dump him.


What’s love got to do with marriage?


Technorati Tag:


Anonymous said...

LauraS - Ahmen to that my Purple sistah!

twiga92 said...

This whole argument really bothers me. People who argue against gay marriage seem to like using the argument that marriage is for having children. I like to view marriage as a partnership - 2 people who love each other and want to be together for the rest of their lives. Companionship, partnership. How can marriage not be about love?

ChrisR said...

Well now folks, if you want to get really traditional, marriage is about the protection of property and wealth, and the strengthening of business/ political/ other alliances through the strategic marrying of one's daughters.

So if the anti-gay brigade wanna be 'traditional' about marriage, how far back did they want to go?

Elise said...

Lewis Black did a *scathing* take on this BS on Wednesday's "Daily Show". There might be highlights on the DS's website (there often are).


kT said...

So if you were a woman who could not physically bear children, or a man who was incapable of having children, are you then banned from legal marriage?

Or if you marry and then discover that you or your partner is infertile, do you have to get divorced?

Robin said...

Are we reverting back like 40 decades? What the hell is going on?