Technofreak:kyhwana2: Also, we've just hashed out why this argument isn't about children at all, so don't try that one again)
Oh really, children can result from a heterosexual relationship but never from a homosexual relationship.
I'm still trying to determine what the need for this bill is to start with. No one has come up with a credible argument as to why it's needed. What does it do that the current law doesn't achieve?
Civil unioned couples can't adopt because they're not "married".
Also, civil unioned couples won't be/might not be recognised as married overseas in countries where they have equal marriage. Also equal marriages from overseas aren't recognised here and only a few "civil unions" from overseas are recognised here.
Also, if one or both of the opposite sex couples is infertile, there's no way children can result from the relationship, just like how they can't result from homosexual relationships. (yet). As I said before, do you support banning infertile couples from getting married?
If not, why not?
What makes an infertile opposite sex couple different from a homosexual couple in this case, in relation to breeding? I'm not seeing one.