|
Yorick, I don't think ability to procreate is a reasonable factor to make any decision on. Many men and women in hetero or homo relationships are not able to procreate, and this is not a basis for marriage rights in any state.
On polygamy I note I've posted regarding that argument before and shan't do it a third/fourth time. Suffice to say that defining a marriage or union as a "coupling" of two people is distinct and separate from defining what genders may "couple." Also, suffice to say the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of polygamny, and it is "right out."
You mention a "scenario." Let me give you a scenario that you can find examples of throughout the country (and I know of one in particular in VT). Man and woman marry. Man has sex change to woman, but state/fed will not allow a change of gender on state/social security rolls. So now we have two seemingly women married, but one is considered to legally be a male. These two people can legally adopt a child jointly (being, legally, man and woman, despite REALITY) while a regular lesbian couple (comprised of two natural women) cannot do so. Is there a disconnect there? I think so.
__________________
 
|