Well, it's not actually true that same sex couples can't have children.
I meant "can't have children together from one another". Apologies for the confusion.
(As an exaggeration: if all people lived together in same-sex couples and were faithful to their partner, nobody would have any children. That's what I meant with "same-sex couples can't have children"; I realise that same-sex couples can acquire children from other sources than through one partner impregnating the other.)
In that case, are we in agreement that it would be better if the state were no longer involved in the concept of "marriage", leaving each religious group to establish their own rules and policies in line with their teachings?
I'll have to think about it, especially in the light of what I've read this evening from some of you.
As I said, I haven't given that much thought to this separation yet, so I'm not sure what would work out how in the long run.
no subject
I meant "can't have children together from one another". Apologies for the confusion.
(As an exaggeration: if all people lived together in same-sex couples and were faithful to their partner, nobody would have any children. That's what I meant with "same-sex couples can't have children"; I realise that same-sex couples can acquire children from other sources than through one partner impregnating the other.)
In that case, are we in agreement that it would be better if the state were no longer involved in the concept of "marriage", leaving each religious group to establish their own rules and policies in line with their teachings?
I'll have to think about it, especially in the light of what I've read this evening from some of you.
As I said, I haven't given that much thought to this separation yet, so I'm not sure what would work out how in the long run.