Kantor on 09 January 2013
| warlord74 said: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOUR5HPg1Mc Hard to poke holes in his argument. |
It is an assertion that:
a) The founding principle of marriage was to have children, and more importantly
b) That we should care about why the institution of marriage was founded rather than what it means today.
His "in principle" line is complete rubbish. In principle, a couple beyond childbearing age cannot bear children. In principle, a couple in which one partner is infertile cannot bear children. To follow his principle, you would need to prohibit people like that from getting married. If you don't, you are saying that marriage can be restricted based on gender and nothing else, and there is no justification for that.
(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective 
