Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance
I find this odd. So lets say you have a group of people who want to allow same-sex marriage. This group deals with opponents who say marriage is only between a man and a woman because a marriage is only for having children. So what is a good way of dealing with said opponents? Give them what they claim to want: Try to pass a law saying that a marriage is only legal if you have proof of procreation within three years of marriage, or the marriage is automatically annulled. There are some other requirements to enforce this and it does not deal with adoption and stuff, but it is not meant to stand up to a court ruling; in fact, they hope to pass it so that it can be struck down by the courts.
It is kind of an odd way of getting your message across, but it may also serve to weaken the Washington Supreme Court’s ruling on Andersen v. King County if this is struck down by the courts. I figured I would post this because we sometimes get the "marriage is for a family" argument and this shows how absurd that one argument can be. As someone said on another forum, it uses "be careful what you ask for, you might just get it" to show how even the people who believe in "marriage is for a family" may balk at having opposite-sex marriages annulled for failure to have children. Sadly, there are a few indoctrinated people who will agree with this law, but I think that they represent the minority.
The website: http://www.wa-doma.org/
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. ..." -- Thomas Jefferson