Wouldn’t it be hilarious if same-sex couples could get married in Iowa—with its pig manure lagoons and family farms—but not in California? The Iowa Supreme Court is hearing arguments today in a case brought to overturn a lower court’s ruling that legalized—for about 15 minutes—marriage equality in that state. Live video feed of oral arguments here. The state is arguing that same-sex marriage “harms kids,” because “after a generation, maybe two, people will see or could come to believe that if it’s not necessary to have its biological father, or its biological mother, then what’s the need for getting married?”

Gee, the state has a point—that’s why it’s currently illegal for single people to bear children out of wedlock, or seek infertility treatment, or adopt children. I mean, if single straight people could do that—if they could have children without a bio mom married to a bio dad, then children might conclude that there’s no need to marry. Makes sense to me!

Wait, what’s that you say? Single straight people can already have children—by hook, by crook, by test tube—right now? And they’ve been doing that for one, maybe two, generations now? And people still want to get married—even gay people? No way!

In addition to being a nationally syndicated sex advice columnist, the author of several books, and the host of the Savage Lovecast, Savage is “a deviant of the highest order” (Daily Caller)....

2 replies on “Marriage Equality’s New Front”

  1. Apparently the state of Iowa, and many of my fellow americans, feel there’s nothing like marriage between two committed adults to screw a kid up. After all, society certainly doesn’t want children raised by two parents who are in love and are committed to making a life together. Damn, I didn’t know the real purpose of marriage was to mess up future generations, I thought marriage was about love and committment.

    Alas, I’m going to need to put money away for my children’s future therapy sessions. My selfish spouse and I had the audacity to marry for love. Shame on us.

  2. The statistics are that kids in healthy “traditional” homes tend to do measurably better than kids in other circumstances. Yes, of course, a kid in a loving home of any kind is better off than a kid in a dysfunctional one.

    The frustrating thing for rational, open-minded people, is that both sides of the argument are so dug in that they can’t admit ANY truth on the other side.

    Reminds me of the abortion debate, with both sides clinging to logical absurdities whereas the truth is obviously in between somewhere.

Comments are closed.