Let's establish some ground rules here. I live in California. I vote. I voted in 2008. I even voted "Yes" on Prop 8. Shocker. Elitist gays don't like that blacks and Latinos tend not to condone gay marriage and they helped Prop 8 pass in 2008 so they take this case to the courts and yo, it ends up in the Supreme Court where it looks likely that the justices won't rule on it. It makes perfect sense to me that the SCOTUS won't rule on something so momentous to our society so soon into the debate. Yes, that's good, sound reasoning.
But what has got me all excited????? It's that the lawyer arguing in favor of Prop 8 tied his whole friggin' argument against gay marriage to the procreation argument. And then the Archbishop of San Francisco jumped on the bandwagon. Really? Is that all these people have?
And holes were punched all through that argument. Kagan asked if the government could deny a marriage license to couples over the age of 55. Would that be unconstitutional? Well, yes it would and the... well, do me a favor and listen to that excerpt of the hearing today.
And Cordileone gets in on the action:
Q: You have spoken of gay marriage as a "natural impossibility." But in terms of procreation, how does it differ from opposite-sex couples who are elderly or infertile?
A: Our bodies have meaning. The conjugal union of a man and a woman is not a factory to produce babies; marriage seeks to create a total community of love, a "one flesh" union of mind, heart and body that includes a willingness to care for any children their bodily union makes together.
Two men and two women can certainly have a close loving committed emotional relationship, but they can never ever join as one flesh in the unique way a husband and wife do.
Infertility is, as you point out, part of the natural life cycle of marriage (people age!), as well as a challenge and disappointment some husbands and wives have to go through. People who have been married for 50 years are no less married because they can no longer have children.
Adoption can be a wonderful happy ending for children who lack even one parent able or willing to care for them. But notice, when a man and woman cannot have children together, that's an accident of circumstances, the exception to the rule. When a husband and wife adopt, they are mirroring the pattern set in nature itself. ...Treating same-sex relationships as marriage is the final severing by government of the natural link between marriage and the great task of bringing together male and female to make and raise the next generation together in love.
It is so comforting to know that my circumstances are viewed by an archbishop as "disappointing." And "an accident of circumstances." Gosh. And all this time I interpreted my experience as an infertile as devastating, life-altering, crushing, against everything I had believed to be true. My infertility is no more than an accident of circumstances. That's life, suckers. And you are being used as a pawn to support an irrational argument against gay marriage. I can't believe my status as a female, heterosexual, married, Catholic is now tied to gay marriage.
Now, as Catholics we don't have to use half-baked arguments to support heterosexual marriage. Don't get me wrong. Of course, marriage is intended "for the increase of mankind." But, it doesn't stop there. "1605 Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone."92 The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help.93 "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."94 The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."95"
I took that from the Vatican's website. Yes, I know it's terrible citing of sources. Marriage and the beauty and mystery of marriage has nothing to do with kids. How a man and a woman relate to one another in a marriage is special full-stop. Why a prominent member of the Church and Prop 8 cronies had to cheapen my (childless) marriage for their own purposes is disgusting. To call me an "extreme minority" and toss me aside as an inconvenient outlier to their statistical model is wrong. Infertiles are not the key to your argument against gay marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman can be defended with better and more compassionate arguments than that.