straight couples MUST have kids?

Discussion in 'Relationships, Discrimination, and Jealousy' started by drumstyck, Feb 8, 2007.

  1. drumstyck

    drumstyck New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Wash. initiative would require married couples to have kids

    [SIZE=-1]12:59 PM PST on Tuesday, February 6, 2007

    [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]KING5.com Staff and Associated Press

    [/SIZE] OLYMPIA, Wash. - An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.


    Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.



    Under the initiative, marriage would be limited to men and women who are able to have children. Couples would be required to prove they can have children in order to get a marriage license, and if they did not have children within three years, their marriage would be subject to annulment.


    All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized" and people in those marriages would be ineligible to receive any marriage benefits.


    “For many years, social conservatives have claimed that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation ... The time has come for these conservatives to be dosed with their own medicine," said WA-DOMA organizer Gregory Gadow in a printed statement. “If same-sex couples should be barred from marriage because they can not have children together, it follows that all couples who cannot or will not have children together should equally be barred from marriage."


    Supporters must gather more than 224,000 valid signatures by July 6 to put the initiative on the November ballot.


    Opponents say the measure is another attack on traditional marriage, but supporters say the move is needed to have a discussion on the high court ruling.









    More Washington News | NWCN.com | News for Seattle, Washington
     
  2. MidusCo.

    MidusCo. New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Who the hell says Im gonna have a kid?
     
  3. Principessa

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    19,494
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Female
    Hahahahahaha That is such total bullshit!

    Is this story real or is it a link from The Onion?

    Assuming it's real there is sooo much wrong with that concept I don't even know where to start.

    This is not the way to win this fight.

    1. Infertile couples should not be made to suffer unnecssarily.
    2. Trust me, you do not want a bunch of women who want desperately to have children but have been thus far unable to do so focusing their pain and anguish into anger as a voting block.
    3. I respect people who don't want children and don't have them.

    On a slightly different note, a few years ago the drunk cheerleader aka G.W.B. tried to pass legislation to fund a program to encourage urban Blacks and Hispanics to marry. He honestly though that would make urban centers safer and more pleasant to live in and visit. Yes, folks there was a tourism link too. :tongue:


     
  4. Gillette

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,309
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    I think this is the perfect way to highlight the foolishness of the conservatives reasoning in denying gay couples legal marriage. It's nothing more than the logical extension of the marriage for procreation argument.

    You're right that non viable couples should not be made to suffer because of their reproductive lack. Just take a moment to recognize that same sex couples fall into the same category.

    Of course there are other ways, adoption, surrogates, in vitro. But these methods are also available for gay couples.

    This isn't being pushed because gays want to punish breeders. I doubt they even want it to pass. It's far better if it gets shot down in flames because the same aguments used to kill this bill can be used to shred the laws barring same sex marriages.

    If anything, this is a rallying cry for hetero couples who either can't or choose not to have children to join with the gay community to say that marriage is for the sole purpose of two people commiting themselves to each other and not about what they are required to produce out of it.

    From my perspective any het who doesn't see the purpose of this is too stupid to breathe let alone breed.
     
  5. Pirate Wench

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2006
    Messages:
    714
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Texas
    That requirement (to have kids) will never get off the ground.......
     
  6. Gillette

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,309
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    I believe that's the whole point.
     
  7. drumstyck

    drumstyck New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    im with gillette...its essentially satire

    the main reason the religious right claims to be against homosexual marriage is because "sex is for procreation, and procreation should only be done in a healthy family environment, which means a man & a woman make babies & live happily ever after...whereas those nasty gays cant have kids, and therefore cant honor the tradition of marriage"

    so this group took that & ran with it, saying "well, if you cant have / dont want kids, you shouldnt be allowed to get married either"...they dont expect a law to really be passed, they just want to point out the idiocy of the conservative viewpoint
     
  8. Gillette

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,309
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    I'm a bit surprised that they haven't taken a step further and made it law that every male who impregnates a female must by law wed her and raise the child with her. Paternity determined by DNA testing of course.

    Wouldn't that make some eyes pop.
     
  9. B_NineInchCock_160IQ

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,378
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    where the sun never sets
  10. Principessa

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    19,494
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Female


    HAHAHAHAHA, Condom sales would go through the roof!
     
  11. HotBulge

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,181
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Lowells talk to Cabots, Cabots talk to God
    This is ludicrous waste of time. Besides, a civil right - in this case, the right for 2 cognitively able, consenting adults to marry - is not up for referendum. In the same way, giving minorities and women the right to suffrage is not up for a referendum.

    This proposal to force heterosexual couples to marry and have children within 3 years even discriminates against middle-aged individuals. What about those straight couples who are divorces and want to remarry yet are beyond the age of natural childbirth? ... I'm just stunned how far a small, reactionary set of the population will doggedly try to resist social change and justice.
     
  12. B_cigarbabe

    B_cigarbabe New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Boston,Mass.
    I hope it passes. Perhaps people will then see how ridiculous is to tell people who can marry, and who cannot. Why the uproar anyway, how does it affect your life personally if gays marry? It doesn't!
    Get real Moral minority!
     
  13. Pjurlover

    Pjurlover New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    67
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC area
    I don't know where to begin with this one it's so f'd up. . . . It is astounding to me that people would think this way, but then maybe it shouldn't be.

    ~ J (married nearly 20 yrs w/o children)
     
  14. AlteredEgo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    14,469
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    6,584
    Location:
    United States
    Yes! Yes it is up for referendum! DUH! That's why this group is acting. You are either not reading, or not thinking. (Or both?) And you are too smart for that. Homosexual men and women- consenting adults- have ALWAYS been denied the civil right to marry and have the same privlages awarded to married heterosexuals. That is the whole point! Radical stunts like this have to be pulled in order to get action. No one expects (or even wants) this law to pass a vote. They don't want to see a bunch of marriages anulled, or marriage as an institution cheapened down to biological functions. Don't be ridiculous.

    Do you even know how women got suffrage? The women fighting for it said some radical shit! Stuff that was just off the wall outrageous. You should look into it. It had a lot to do with being better able to opress black people, and precious little to do with liberating women. I'm pretty sure liberating women was far more important to the women fighting for sufferage, but they said what they had to say. Only radical notions can affect change. You have to get people angry, in order to get people talking.
     
  15. clarkma86

    clarkma86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    California
    Clearly nobody expects something like this to pass. It's merely there to highlight the hypocricy in the anti-gay marriage argument that marriage must be protected from gays and lesbians because its main function is to ensure procreation. It's entirely symbolic and I support it on that ground.
     
  16. amhersthungboi

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    380
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Australia
    It's about time we starting giving the radical right a dose of their own medicine! Hell, why not have a similar ban on "unnatural" [after all, having children is the state of nature, at least according to the whacko right] marriages in every state that denied the right to marry to gay couples?

    I love the fact that when gay marriage is up for debate we're just supposed to take it ... but when the validity of straight marriage is up for debate, suddenly people get pissed off. Hypocrisy? Absolutely.
     
  17. chico8

    chico8 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Chico
    You obviously didn't read very closely. The whole point is the WA state supreme court explicitly emphasized procreation as a reason to limit marriage to opposite sex couples.

    I'm all for it and I hope that this referendum forces people to realize how idiotic the ban on same sex marriages is.
     
  18. joyboytoy79

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,557
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC-ish
    Unfortunately, i think this movement is a little too intellectual for the common folk of today's USA. I think the majority of the heterosexual couples out there are going to see this as a direct attack on their right to do whatever they want. They don't care that other people don't have the same rights. Too many of our fellow americans are too caught up in themselves to care about the plight of the man next to them. They're going to see this as another fringe group trying to take something away from "ME."

    Still, i agree with the message WA-DOMA is trying to send. If we could only dumb it down a little for the average, dim-witted, greedy american.
     
  19. Nitrofiend

    Nitrofiend New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I think most people shouldn't be allowed to have kids...period.
     
  20. Sklar

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,279
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington state

    Here in Washington State, EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING, can be settled by referendum. From Taxes to state audits to anything you can get enough signatures for can be put on the ballot.

    As much as I am a conservative I actually like this. Not that I think it's going to pass but here in Washington, which is a very liberal state, it could either go down in flames or pass and shock people. I'd give it 50/50 of going either way.

    The State legislature has been grumbling loudly, recently, that they do not like the referendum process. The people of the state love it as they feel that they are actually participating in shaping the future of the state. Plus, the vast majority of people view this process as a check on the Government.

    It IS satire but it IS being taken seriously. I would love it if the far right bible thumpers got a taste of their own medicine. Make them actually walk the walk instead of preaching from a couch.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted