🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <31DB57F8.5A8F@deltanet.com>,
Todd Andrews  <tandrews@deltanet.com> wrote:
>David W. Fenton wrote:
>> 
>> [References: trimmed to keep post from failing]
>> 
>> Todd Andrews (tandrews@deltanet.com) wrote:
>> : David W. Fenton wrote:
>> : > Reliance on the reproduction argument is an admission of 
>> : > defeat since the
>> : > institution of _civil_ marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with
>> : > procreation.
>> :
>> : WRong, dude.  The primary benefit offered to society, and the reason
>> : that society gives such benefits to marriage (men and women, only) is
>> : because it raises the next generation.
>> 
>> Here's your assignment for the day, Todd:
>> 
>> In one or more paragraphs, explain the difference between procreation and
>> parenting.
>
>Your rank arrogance notwithstanding:
>
>"raises the next generation" is  reference to parenting. Got it?


Ah, but dear, you need to *make* *the* *connection.*

Hint:  same sex couples can, and do, *raise* children, and opposite couples
can get married whether or not they intend to, or even have the capability 
of, producing and *raising* children.  

So no, *raising* children is not the core of your argument.

Dude.

-- 
Ellen Evans					May I get you a drink?
jeeves@mtcc.com