I think the assumption is, that opposite-sex couples are "expected" to have children in the "normal" way, while same-sex couples cannot. This is a poor assumption. My point is that with increasing frequency straight couples cannot, which puts them (us) in the same predicament as same-sex couples.
With increasing frequency, same-sex couples choose to raise a family -- by whatever means, and I think that our reasonable observer realizes this, and it will soon become a normal expectation if it hasn't already. Just like straight folks. I think that the "conjugal" view is actually elastic enough to incorporate this. In any case I do not see exclusionary language in the definition. Thanks again. -Z ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Scarberry" <mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu> To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 9:12:14 PM Subject: Re: Marriage -- the Alito dissent The biological issues with regard to different sex couples mostly can be answered fairly easily, I think, including with these points: With regard to medical or similar issues that prevent procreation, a state inquiry would intrude substantially on privacy, which would justify the state in not inquiring. (Also, some couples who have given up on conceiving, later are surprised to find that they have.) With regard to age, no bright line can be set that accurately distinguishes those who can from those who cannot procreate. Any line based on experience as to an age after which procreation cannot occur would either be impossible to set - men can procreate to a very old age - or would have to discriminate against women, who lose the ability to become pregnant by a particular upper bound (absent miracles as with Sarah and Abraham) that is much younger than any age that could possibly be set for men. Thus there are good reasons not to set an age limit. Mark Scarberry Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
