SCOTUS protects marriage equality

[QP!]

@Jake Starkey has been reduced to obsessing over religion.
@AProudLefty has been reduced to obsessing over The Bible.
@WinterBorn has been reduced to obsessing over various procreation-related circumstances (and now laughter).

None of them wish to focus on the etymology of the word 'marriage'.
None of them wish to focus on the fact that the man/woman union is the only union that can procreate.

The etymology of a word does not matter, and is not locked in stone as a society evolves.

Words are made up to begin with and given whatever meaning someone wants to assign them, and by the same method words evolve and change. It is how language works.

Procreation has not been key to marriage anywhere in the world for ages. For instance do you think if a man and woman marry and it discovered soon after one of them is cannot have children, do you think gov't should dissolve their marriage and let the fertile one know they can remarry someone else if they want, while telling the infertile one they can never marry again?

What about if that couple, upon learning one was not fertile was in the process of adopting children?

 

[Jake Starkey]

@Jake Starkey has been reduced to obsessing over religion.
@AProudLefty has been reduced to obsessing over The Bible.
@WinterBorn has been reduced to obsessing over various procreation-related circumstances (and now laughter).

None of them wish to focus on the etymology of the word 'marriage'.
None of them wish to focus on the fact that the man/woman union is the only union that can procreate.

The etymology of the word 'marriage' is unimportant except to you.

SCOTUS has decided not to examine the argument.