A decent question so here is your answer.
“How do you counter this?”

http://madelynlang469.com/2015/06/13/dont-use-my-pain-as-a-weapon-infertility-and-same-sex-marriage/ which refers to this original post: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15155/ and my answer follows.

So three points to make and in the proper order listed below.

First and foremost:

I am sorry for your pain, I pray someday even if it seems impossible that you know the joys of being a parent. There is also adoption, many children need a good home you could provide. Many couples including same-sex couples raise children and studies show there is no harm done to children raised in either type of household.

I honestly wish this for you because it’s the loving wish to make. Anyone who knows me, has read anything I’ve written knows I value life. They know I love my son and my wife. They also know I see motherhood as my greatest blessing. I wish that same blessing for everyone, I wish the joys of being a parent to everyone.

Love is not biological, it’s a choice.

That said here is the rest of the answer,

Second the argument itself:

This argument is both vile and insensitive but it was originally made by the attorney representing Christians and has been repeated in every court hearing on this matter by those who would argue against SSM (Same-Sex Marriage). They argue ineffectively that marriage is holy and protected by God and is for the sole purpose of having and raising children.

The argument is used to argue to deny protections and rights of marriage from same-sex couples based on the laws of their own God. This argument was never loving nor kind you are most correct in this.

Let me also say you don’t reinforce your argument when you say things like this.

Redefining marriage to include same-sex unions severs the connection between marriage and children in a way that recognizing the marriages of childless heterosexual couples does not. The possibility and even the desire to have children together must be discarded upfront. Instead of being viewed as an important aspect of marital love that some couples will, by mischance or age, be unable to fulfill, bearing children and raising them together becomes entirely optional, even more than in the case of voluntarily sterile couples.

You by saying exactly that make the same argument. That because two men or two women can’t have natural children that they can’t get married. See the dilemma you created? You on the one hand say you’re tired of people saying exactly what you are saying. That marriage is solely about kids and that SSC (Same-Sex Couples) can’t marry because they can’t have kids but that SSC should stop repeating the argument made by those defending marriage against SSM to you.

Not bad eh? So it is as vile and cruel for anyone to say to you that because you are having troubles producing offspring that your marriage is invalid as it is for you to use the same argument in reverse.

Last it is not a redefinition of biblical marriage as we will discuss next. It is about making the law of the Untied States equal in it’s protections. So let’s get away from the ugly attempt to make marriage solely about children.

Third we aren’t discussing your religious beliefs on marriage:

We are discussing mans law which grants rights under the law. What rights? Well here is a small list.


See I understand you see marriage as defined by your bible. The problem is most people (Christians mostly) can’t separate the legal definition from the biblical definition. There in lay the problem.

Want proof Marriage in America is NOT biblical Marriage?

1) None pastors/priests/clergy can marry people. Like the captain of a ship, Judges, Magistrates, Justices of the Peace and more. None of these are required to be religious in any way. Many aren’t Christian and many more aren’t ordained by God as a minister to join people.

2) The state requires you to buy a “Marriage License” and have it filled out, notarized and returned to the state to make your “Marriage legal”. Without that piece of paper you receive none of the rights listed above. So the state allows you to marry and controls the entire distribution of rights.

3) If the person performing the marriage leaves out the words “by the power vested in me by the state of (fill in your state here)” your marriage is not legal.

We can also discuss when two eighty year olds marry. It’s about companionship and sharing your life. It’s about creating a legal bond and declaring your love and didication. In this case it’s not about children. Every marriage is about these things first and foremost.

The entire process legally of marriage is a state run contract between two consenting people. It grants rights and responsibilities to the couples. It assigns via the contract recognition by the state and federal government.

Because it’s a law of the United States it falls under the control of the constitution of this nation. It is protected against “religious” definitions based on protections from using religion to discriminate against any group of people. Freedom of religion isn’t just your right to pray as you like, it’s my right to not have you use your faith to make laws which exclude me.

I’ve spoken ad nauseum about this subject.





I could go on but reading those you’ll see the entire argument isn’t about kids. It never has been. It isn’t about your God, your biblical definition and it never has been. It’s about the law of man.

We have separation of church and state and that includes as previously stated the laws. I am by definition of the constitution and the fourteenth amendment guaranteed equal protection under the law. That means EVERY law of this country. There has to be compelling reason to exclude me from the law.

Wrapping that up:

You’re right that it’s vile, insensitive and cruel to throw this in your face the way you’ve explained. it’s equally as vile, insensitive and cruel to deny any citizen the full protection of the law. We don’t have to agree with each other, we don’t have to approve of each others choices, but we DO have to stand up and make sure every citizen is protected fully under the law, EVERY law.

Remember my quote above? Love is not biological, it’s a choice. Well you can choose to love all people or you can choose to hate. I choose love. I love both of these bloggers. I follow one and love what she has to say. She is engaging and smart but  sometimes we disagree and that’s ok. I disagree that this posts couldn’t be countered and just countered it with ease.

But that doesn’t change my love or respect for the lady who asked the question. Thanks for asking maybe now we can speak about the law so my argument is stated below. Feel free to refute it.

Here is the argument you can’t refute as I just did yours.

I challenge you to provide one good reason I should be denied equal protections to the rights granted by the LAW of marriage in the United States.

Remember when answering because of separation of church and state you can’t use your bible as a reason to exclude me from any law. After all the bible says stone gay people and well you can’t legally do that either. Separate your biblical definition and look at the law of the United States.

One good reason I should not be able to pass my wife of 16 years the house and property we own together? One good reason I should have to quit my job to care for my wife of 16 years if she gets sick rather than enjoy the protections of the family medical leave act? One good reason I shouldn’t be able to see my wife of sixteen years if she becomes ill in the ICU?

See all these are granted and more under the legal definition of marriage in the United States. The legal definition is merely a contract recognized by the state and federal government and nothing more.

I am waiting for your reply. One reason not based on your bible?