For several days now, I?ve been in a running argument with an individual who goes by the name of ?On Lawn? over in the comments sections of the blog ran by anti-gay equality group National Organization for Marriage. In several comments here, here, and here, this person seems to imply that procreation, or at least the potential for procreation, is a requirement of marriage. I?ve tried several times to get this person to explain this concept but they keep brushing off the question calling it absurd. When I tried to point out that there is no link between marriage and procreation they came back with this.
Well, there shows the damage they want to do to the institution. If marriage can?t look equally at the interests of all involved in the practice of human mating, then you tell me what can.
Prehistoric humans didn?t marry before they mated, they just found a bush did it. When you look at the whole of human history, marriage is a relatively new creation, only being a few thousand years old. Our very existence proves that marriage is not a requirement or an essential element of the human mating process.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has announced that the US has agreed to recognized the Libyan rebel group Transitional National Council as the legitimate government of Libya. This will free up $30 billion in frozen assets for the rebels who have been struggling to fund their conflict with Gadhafi who has ruled the country for 42 years. France and Italy did the same earlier in the conflict. While this is a good step forward for the rebels, the conflict is far from over and far from certain. Gadhafi continues to have a strong hold on the capitol of Tripoli.