And given that Australia, like Canada, like Russia, is far from being all suitable for agriculture.
And that Australia, like Canada, like USA and like most of Europe, sends heaps of human garbage to be processed abroad... in poorer countries
Not in Australia, you couldn't. Most of it's desert. It's uninhabitable by anyone that doesn't keep moving in order to find food. It is just not fertile enough for everyone in the world to have their own subsistence level farm. Even if that were possible, the exponential rate of population growth would make that unsustainable within a generation.
Australia's experience of "individual farming" is that such people cannot survive without government welfare top ups. Most small farming types end up back in the city for the sake of their children. Small farms cannot compete with the huge industrial plots that feed the city populations.
but you must have at least 1-2 kids so you procreate and pass down your genes so some "part" of you survives.
The word "must" has no place in that sentence. You should investigate the is-ought divide.
Please tell me you're joking.
IF you do not have any children, you are weak and your genes dissipate.
That's silly. There is nothing "weak" about allowing your genes to dissipate. Darwinian reproduction is not a demonstration of "strength". Reproductive success is reproductive success: no more and no less. Our strength as human beings is not related to how long we can keep our genes in circulation.
What does a marriage contract have to do with the perks of marriage.. If you have an issue with the tax laws then so be it. Go after them...
People have a right to offically have a family, the same last name for the adults and the children.
If you don't want to get married, don't.
Really? That's your opinion.. you stand by it..
I'm married 26yrs. and it wasn't for the perks... Speak for yourself, not for me...
If you couldn't get married because of your sexuality, you'd think it was a right... or not...