Is marriage primarily for procreation or family bonds & commitment?

Politics and Social Issues
21
No, gays have more sex because they are guys, and guys like to have a lot of sex. Simple.
So what difference does it make if the partner is male or female? Men are men no matter who they are screwing. LL
22

Very good point, Lois. :lol:
Occam

23

For what its worth by Joe Wenke in his book “Papal Bull” on the purpose of sex.
According to many true believers the purpose of sex is procreation. It is true the bigger the lie the more people believe it and this is a biggie. I mean is there a single person in the entire history of humanity who when experiencing that first moment of sexual awareness shouts, WOW, there it is? It just kicked in. I am now feeling the urge to procreate. THANK YOU PUBERTY! I am now willing and able to fulfill my obligation to perpetuate my species.

24

Quite true. The sex drive involves the pleasure one gets from it with no thought of procreation. It’s just part of the motivation system built in to accomplish species survival.
Occam

25
For what its worth by Joe Wenke in his book "Papal Bull" on the purpose of sex. According to many true believers the purpose of sex is procreation. It is true the bigger the lie the more people believe it and this is a biggie. I mean is there a single person in the entire history of humanity who when experiencing that first moment of sexual awareness shouts, WOW, there it is? It just kicked in. I am now feeling the urge to procreate. THANK YOU PUBERTY! I am now willing and able to fulfill my obligation to perpetuate my species.
No, all they can usually get out is "Oh, God," isn't it? :-) Lois
26

If anything, I think some conservative groups (after reading most of the articles on their website), are unknowingly undermining their own argument; for example, an often used argument is that marriage is not about the “wants and desires of adults, but about children”–to me this paints an unhappy picture almost stating that two parents don’t even need to be happy as long as they’re fulfilling the primal procreative duties of society within the context of a “god” approved marriage, but if the parents really are unhappy or grow unhappy shortly after marriage, regardless of them being two opposite sex partners, their dissatisfaction is bound to manifest in negative ways resulting in a miserable existence together and children will suffer from that.
Just recently heard something that made me feel better: I was talking with a lady who raised a good point which was that she thought two gay men adopting a child was admirable because going through the adoption process is not easy and can certainly demonstrate the desire to be a parent and obviously cannot be an “unplanned child” or decision made without much thought, thus making a case for showing that gay people aren’t just self-absorbed people who desire to give nothing to society or somehow break it down.

27
Just recently heard something that made me feel better: I was talking with a lady who raised a good point which was that she thought two gay men adopting a child was admirable because going through the adoption process is not easy and can certainly demonstrate the desire to be a parent and obviously cannot be an "unplanned child" or decision made without much thought, thus making a case for showing that gay people aren't just self-absorbed people who desire to give nothing to society or somehow break it down.
Cool, excellent point! How refreshing - something that actually makes sense.
28
It's primarily for family stability, which then makes for more social stability. Despite the many differences the marriage concept has gone through over time, it's always been about stability. Marriage is obviously not necessary for "commitment" to a person in a romantic/sexual sense, but in heterosexual relationships at least, the possibility of procreating is usually a risk that can't be completely avoided; that means thoughts about family, etc. will enter the picture at some point. For that reason, the concept of marriage will always be fixed on straight couples.
Not if the woman is past menopause or has had a hysterectomy. Gay couples do adopt and sometimes one or both give birth using AI or surrogacy. So it isn't just heterosexual couples that want families. There are many ways to create a family. A lot of heterosexual couples don't want kids and don't have them. Would they be any less married? Lois
29
If anything, I think some conservative groups (after reading most of the articles on their website), are unknowingly undermining their own argument; for example, an often used argument is that marriage is not about the "wants and desires of adults, but about children"--to me this paints an unhappy picture almost stating that two parents don't even need to be happy as long as they're fulfilling the primal procreative duties of society *within the context of a "god" approved marriage,* but if the parents really are unhappy or grow unhappy shortly after marriage, regardless of them being two opposite sex partners, their dissatisfaction is bound to manifest in negative ways resulting in a miserable existence together and children will suffer from that.
Unless the parents are extreme narcissists, the kids won't suffer that much.
Just recently heard something that made me feel better: I was talking with a lady who raised a good point which was that she thought two gay men adopting a child was admirable because going through the adoption process is not easy and can certainly demonstrate the desire to be a parent and obviously cannot be an "unplanned child" or decision made without much thought, thus making a case for showing that gay people aren't just self-absorbed people who desire to give nothing to society or somehow break it down.
It can certainly be admirable in many cases, but it's naive to use that as a test of parental suitability(Not saying you do this). This is a recent tragedy - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/game-of-thrones-reminds-foster-dad-of-dead-baby-in-hot-car/
30
A lot of heterosexual couples don't want kids and don't have them. Would they be any less married? Lois
I think so. It seems that a lot of people have less respect - and often feel sorry for childless married couples, many people don't see their marriages as worthwhile as they do for reproducing married couples. Although as I posted a few days ago, traditional marriage itself is being seen as less worthwhile by the young adults.
31

Agreed, although most still claim to be theists, it appears that religion and the things that go along with it are fading in imporatance. Examples are marriage, prayers, baptisms, church membership and attendance, etc.
Occam

32
It indicates that I didn't agree with what Occam said.
No, there is something more going on there. You're afraid of something. Lois
33

Nope. All I care for is just the facts, ma’am. I’ll leave the emotions to you.

34
It's primarily for family stability, which then makes for more social stability. Despite the many differences the marriage concept has gone through over time, it's always been about stability. Marriage is obviously not necessary for "commitment" to a person in a romantic/sexual sense, but in heterosexual relationships at least, the possibility of procreating is usually a risk that can't be completely avoided; that means thoughts about family, etc. will enter the picture at some point. For that reason, the concept of marriage will always be fixed on straight couples.
Well, it doesn't seem to be working very well in terms of stability if you consider he divorce rate, domestic abuse, etc., does it? The gays I know who are married (and I know quite a few) have much more stable marriages than many of the married heterosexuals I know. Lois It's not about stability for the partners, it about stability for "family" - meaning a man and a woman who produce children. Studies show that it's better for kids to grow up with married parents living in the same house. But yes, the traditional American marriage concept seems to be dying. It will be replaced by something else, just like it replaced an earlier model. How about if the married parents are gay? I know several such families. Two men married to each other raising an adopted daughter. Two women married to each other raising the biological daughter of one and an adopted son. Two men married to each other raising a son. (There are others.) All of these children seem stable and well adjusted. At the same time I have married heterosexual friends who have biological children and the kids are a mess. I realize this isn't a scientific survey, but it's my experience. Meanwhille, where do your statistics come from that "it's better for kids to grow up with married parents living in the same house"? Better than what? Please provide citations of scientific studies that the children of married heterosexual parents are "better" than the children of married gay parents. And how are they "better" ? Lois
35
Nope. All I care for is just the facts, ma'am. I'll leave the emotions to you.
No you don"t. You apparently don't know a fact from an emotion. Your views are chock full of emotion and almost devoid of facts--and you are completely unaware of it, which makes it much worse. Lois
36
A lot of heterosexual couples don't want kids and don't have them. Would they be any less married? Lois
I think so. It seems that a lot of people have less respect - and often feel sorry for childless married couples, many people don't see their marriages as worthwhile as they do for reproducing married couples. Although as I posted a few days ago, traditional marriage itself is being seen as less worthwhile by the young adults. Does it matter what other people think of anyone's marriage? Isn't it up to the couple to decide if they are happy? What anyone else thinks of their marriage means nothing. But you bring up a point I hadn't thought of until I read your post. You apparently think that even a gay couple with a child or children are more "married" than a heterosexual couple without children. So that puts a whole different spin on the subject that you probably didn't mean to give it. Lois
37
Does it matter what other people think of anyone's marriage? Isn't it up to the couple to decide if they are happy? What anyone else thinks of their marriage means nothing.
Yes, any social arrangement requires others to have (at least) some recognition of it. This strongly pertains to gay marriage.
But you bring up a point I hadn't thought of until I read your post. You apparently think that even a gay couple with a child or children are more "married" than a heterosexual couple without children. So that puts a whole different spin on the subject that you probably didn't mean to give it. Lois
No, I don't think most people would consider a gay married couple with kids to be on the same level as a straight couple with kids.
38
Meanwhille, where do your statistics come from that "it's better for kids to grow up with married parents living in the same house"? Better than what? Please provide citations of scientific studies that the children of married heterosexual parents are "better" than the children of married gay parents. And how are they "better" ? Lois
http://www.worldmag.com/2014/05/cdc_children_do_best_with_two_biological_parents
39
If anything, I think some conservative groups (after reading most of the articles on their website), are unknowingly undermining their own argument; for example, an often used argument is that marriage is not about the "wants and desires of adults, but about children"--to me this paints an unhappy picture almost stating that two parents don't even need to be happy as long as they're fulfilling the primal procreative duties of society *within the context of a "god" approved marriage,* but if the parents really are unhappy or grow unhappy shortly after marriage, regardless of them being two opposite sex partners, their dissatisfaction is bound to manifest in negative ways resulting in a miserable existence together and children will suffer from that.
Unless the parents are extreme narcissists, the kids won't suffer that much.
Just recently heard something that made me feel better: I was talking with a lady who raised a good point which was that she thought two gay men adopting a child was admirable because going through the adoption process is not easy and can certainly demonstrate the desire to be a parent and obviously cannot be an "unplanned child" or decision made without much thought, thus making a case for showing that gay people aren't just self-absorbed people who desire to give nothing to society or somehow break it down.
It can certainly be admirable in many cases, but it's naive to use that as a test of parental suitability(Not saying you do this). This is a recent tragedy - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/game-of-thrones-reminds-foster-dad-of-dead-baby-in-hot-car/ Certainly, it's a generalized statement and there are other factors that go into suitability of being a parent; but at the same time, adopting and going through the process of adoption is an intentional process, not one that happens by accident or is unplanned, nor is a gay couple likely to adopt at a young age before preparation and maturity necessary for raising a family and I find that significant. Adoption, from what I observe usually takes place after a couple has solidified their careers, purchased a home and settled down. Picture the two scenarios (and this is not to bash the heterosexual couple, rather demonstrate a point): a hetero couple is both 21 years of age who have known each other under a year have a shotgun wedding because a baby is on the way, they're likely living in an apartment or even with parents and have not solidified career plans or settled into life or a house. Then there is a gay couple, both 37 years of age, they've been together for 10 years been through the ups and downs of the relationship and have worked out issues, purchased their home 3 years ago and both have long finished their degrees and settled into their careers (this same scenario of course can apply to a heterosexual couple as well, but from what I observe, because same sex couples must intentionally adopt, it usually comes later than heterosexual couples, nor is there a biological clock ticking or societal pressures on gay couples to have a family before a certain age and I think this can be advantageous.