Opinion
Grading City Hall: See our report card for L.A. City Council President Herb Wesson
Opinion L.A.
Opinion Opinion L.A.
Opinion

Texas' ludicrous legal procreation argument against gay marriage

States can't interfere with whether couples, married or not, choose to have children
Don't mess with Texas? How about Texas don't mess with same-sex couples' desire to wed and have children?

Does the attorney general of Texas have so little of worth to say against same-sex marriage that he's reduced to the nonsensical argument that the state can ban it because there's a legitimate public interest in encouraging procreation?

Well, yes, probably he doesn't have anything of worth to say. Opponents of same-sex marriage have clearly had a tough time. It's frustrating when they can't come up with a single rational argument to present to a judge. They already were unable in court to identify a way in which gay marriage harms traditional heterosexual marriage, though they cling to that claim anyway. The good-parenting argument collapses on its own illogic -- even if there were clear proof that children fare best in a traditional mommy-daddy household, and there isn't. We don't prohibit others from marrying based on whether they would make good parents, even though we have pretty good evidence that domestic abusers and alcoholics have less-than-ideal parenting skills.

But this argument by Texas Atty. Gen. Greg Abbott is so specious on so many levels, I can only imagine he privately cringed with embarrassment when he used it in an actual court case.

To start with, as Abbott surely knows, marriage doesn't necessarily have much to do with procreation. Gay and lesbian couples are going to have or adopt children if they want them, and won't if they don't, whether or not they are married. If anything, one could argue that the ability to wed might have a slight positive impact on procreation because these couples would foresee their families having the same social status as all other families.

Unmarried straight people have children. And many heterosexual couples don't. Does Abbott want to ban postmenopausal women from marrying? Men who can't produce viable sperm?  If the state indeed has a valid legal interest in procreation -- though I'd suggest it keep its nose out of people's family business -- then doesn't it have an obligation to provide low-cost child care so that women can afford to go to work so that they could afford to have more children?

Though if the state feels it needs to keep growing its population, there's a quick way it could probably do that -- by offering to provide a welcoming home for the children fleeing other countries who have shown up in such large numbers along its border.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • Marco Rubio needs a vocab lesson on same-sex marriage and intolerance

    Marco Rubio needs a vocab lesson on same-sex marriage and intolerance

    It’s so easy — and popular — to claim to be a victim these days. The latest victims, as U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) would have you believe, are people who try to stop same-sex couples from being able to marry. As he put it in a speech Wednesday at Catholic University of America in Washington,...

  • Malaysia and the cynical politics of free trade

    Malaysia and the cynical politics of free trade

    When Congress granted President Obama fast-track authority in June to negotiate trade deals, it included an amendment by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) barring any nation on the bottom rung of the State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons report from being part of a trade pact with the United...

  • Israeli policies sparked the deadly Duma fire

    Israeli policies sparked the deadly Duma fire

    Friday's horrific arson attack on a Palestinian home by suspected Israeli extremists, in which an 18-month-old Palestinian toddler was burned to death, was, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared, "a terrorist crime." What he did not say was that the attack on the Dawabshe family...

  • A legal -- for now -- end-run around Citizens United

    A legal -- for now -- end-run around Citizens United

    With the 2016 election looming, Republicans in Congress want to make sure that the Internal Revenue Service won't crack down on tax-exempt "social welfare" groups that serve as conduits for untraceable political spending. And the commissioner of the IRS has indicated that, in any event, the agency...

  • Would you work for $1 to $3 a day?

    Would you work for $1 to $3 a day?

    Each year, tens of thousands of people being held in the federal immigration detention system are put to work scrubbing floors, cooking meals and landscaping grounds, among other menial jobs. They can work as much as eight hours a day and 40 hours a week. The pay: $1 to $3 a day.

  • Before Watts '65: A black cop's view of the LAPD

    Before Watts '65: A black cop's view of the LAPD

    Fifty years ago, five days after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act to guarantee black Americans a voice at the ballot box, other black voices made themselves heard in Los Angeles. By the time the Watts riots were over, 34 people were dead. Watts was Norman E. Edelen's neighborhood...

  • A quick guide to the candidates in Thursday's Republican debate

    A quick guide to the candidates in Thursday's Republican debate

    The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus, hasn't had many nice things to say about Donald Trump lately, but he ought to thank the trash-talking mogul for this: Trump will draw millions of viewers to the GOP's first presidential debate on Thursday, giving the party a chance...

  • Does owning a gun make you safer?

    Does owning a gun make you safer?

    The United States has the most heavily armed civilian population in the First World; our homes contain enough firearms for every man, woman and child.

Comments
Loading
69°