Discussion: Kentucky: Ban Gay Marriage Because Procreation Is Good For The Economy

TPM Article Topics
21

Do McConnell and his wife have children? If not, then they need to be divorced in the name of the good State of Kentucky and be put out to breed.

5 Likes
22

it’s the only explanation that makes any sense at all.

because, well, this makes no sense at all.

23

Except that since Windsor last year, and its invocation of the 14th Amendment, every argument they’ve used has crashed and burned. Yes, this is a patently silly argument, but what else have they got, really?

24

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

2 Likes
25

No. It just means that you can’t marry after you’ve gone through change of life or had a vasectomy. Perfectly logical.

26

I get it, if two gay guys are denied marriage they’ll automatically begin cranking out rug-rats despite lacking the plumbing to do so. Ah, Kentucky, I can hear the dueling banjos from here.

27

This is fairly obviously a response to the contention, expressed in every opinion overturning same-sex marriage bans, that the state has no compelling interest in banning gay marriage. However, the counterarguments are so obvious that not only will it not fly, it is likely to blow up on the runway.

28

Seems to me there’s an emerging thread. Consider the Christo-fascist “Quiver” movements, the freakish demand for government control of the uterus, the empowering of employers to deny employees health insurance to prevent pregnancy, and now this, more anti-gay bigotry on the grounds it ain’t makin’ babies, all in the context of the undeniably changing demographics.

These white supremacists have stared into the face of the future of America and concluded that it’s not a white one, so they’re investing their whole existence into making babies in a desperate attempt to maintain racial supremacy. I just had an individual remark how all those black folk are reproducing so much faster than whites, and oh, those Mexicans!

1 Like
29

I’d recommend seven years, because that coincides with the infamous “itch.” Seems like a natural.

30

“The lawyers argued opposite-sex married couples recoup the state for the tax benefits they recieve by procreating and thereby improving the state’s economy. Same-sex couples, they argued, do not.”

Say what? What are those guys smoking?

What’s next – the state gets to deny marriage licenses to infertile couples? Because I guess infertile heterosexual couples don’t contribute to the state’s economy either.

31

Maybe they should outlaw vasectomies and tubal ligations while they are at it.

32

I almost choked on my coffee when I read that!

1 Like
33

Yep. Cheaper to put women like myself on an ice floe.

34

Liberty Univ School of Law perhaps?