THE WORLD IN CRISIS

From the Chron:

The future of same-sex marriage in California was left in the hands of a San Francisco Superior Court judge Thursday after a conservative group closed two days of hearings by arguing that gays and lesbians were inherently unfit for marriage.

"They can't perform the basic functions of marriage," said Rena Lindevaldsen, an attorney for the Campaign for California Families. "There is a basic difference between opposite-sex and same-sex couples ... the ability to procreate and, therefore, insure the existence and survival of our species."

Wow! I had no idea that our species was in such dire straits! This suggests that anti-gay conservatives have even less faith in Bush's foreign policy than I have!

Of course, there are plenty of non-humorous things wrong with this argument...

--It's a slap in the face to any hetero couple who has ever adopted. It's a slap in the face to any married couple who cared enough about the plight of children born into unfortunate circumstances that they took them in as their own. It's funny how whenever opponents of gay marriage open their mouths, they say things that neglect to address hetero adoption.

--It makes the hilarous assertion that the legal status of gay marriage is somehow a determining factor in the number of total children born. That is, if gay marriage were legal, the number of childbirths would go down. Soooo does this mean hetero couples are going to stop having children or something? If not, how does this affect "the existence and survival of the human species"?

The flip-side is that if gay marriage is banned, the number of childbirths would rise. Gah? Would the statewide preservation of the "sanctity of marriage" encourage otherwise-reluctant married couples to procreate like jackrabbits? Or -- and this is really problematic -- are we to believe that should gay marriage remain illegal, homosexuals would find their way into heterosexual relationships that produce children? Do opponents of gay marriage want that?

Well, yes. There's a reason for it: They believe that nobody is born gay. Here in this statement made by a lawyer at a San Francisco courthouse, we find yet another example of the fact that the issues of gay marriage and the legitimacy of alternative sexuality in general are inextricably linked. I'd love it if the "you can oppose gay marriage and not be homophobic" crowd would think about this for a while. (And yes, that includes hedgers like Boxer and Kerry)

You know what you get with their idea? More Jim McGreevey-type scenarios.

Anyway, I'll make it my special gift to the baby Jesus tomorrow to impregnate someone or something. You know, if it'll help our species and all. Reeeepoooorrrrrtttiiiinnnggg fooooorrrrr duuuuuuuuuuttyyyyyy!