Christians think tanks, such as those at the Family Research Council, use the child bearing one a lot. I don't think its a very good argument.
The FRC version of it reasons that:
1. It is the only relevant factor, i.e. ignoring property rights and more in regards to marriage because "unions" and other legal statuses can deal with that
2. The fact that many couples choose not to or are incapable of having children does not put a damper in their stance because those who don't intend to have children might change their minds, and those incapable might be surprised and have one
The idea that the couple can use an alternate legal method to attain couples rights sounds exactly like Sophie's picture, to me.
The 2nd justification is just plain silly. Many couples who choose not to have children simply will not change their minds, and there are ways to reduce the chances of childbearing to close to 0 that we can safely say they won't have any accidents. Some people marry at very old ages, or who are missing the means to reproduce, for whatever reason, such that they definitely won't be surprised with a child... we don't discriminate against these people for wanting to have a marriage even if it definitely won't involve having a child.
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Unseen in Small Talk 23 hours ago.
Started by TJ in Small Talk. Last reply by Davis Goodman 11 hours ago.
Started by JadeBlackOlive in Small Talk. Last reply by Unseen 3 hours ago.
Started by Farahat Rashad in Small Talk. Last reply by TJ 12 hours ago.
Started by Belle Rose in Society. Last reply by Reg The Fronkey Farmer on Tuesday.
Sunday School August 21th 2016
Sunday School August 14th 2016
Sunday School August 7th 2016
Posted by Noon Alif on August 24, 2016 at 6:30pm
Posted by A. T. Heist on August 24, 2016 at 3:18pm
Computer Help Forums
© 2016 Created by umar.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.