On the subject of abortion and related women’s health issues, Attorney General Greg Abbott argues that the state has an interest in not taking a life. On the subject of defending the state’s ban on gay marriage, however, he argues that Texas has an interest in procreation.
Really? Coming from a guy who has problems with government extending its reach into private matters, the procreation argument is is an astounding overreach of legal reasoning.
In the brief filed to defend the state’s ban on gay marriage, Abbott claims that since Texas considers marriage to be between a man and a woman, this is a relationship that ”increases the likelihood” that they will produce and raise their children in “stable, lasting relationships.”
“Because same-sex relationships do not naturally produce children, recognizing same-sex marriage does not further these goals to the same extent that recognizing opposite-sex marriage does,” the brief reads. “That is enough to supply a rational basis for Texas’s marriage laws.”
Put aside the domestic abuse and divorce statistics, which argue against marriage always producing “stable lasting relationships.” Now let’s extend the attorney general’s rationale to its illogical conclusion. How about determining the number of children a family should have and when they should have them? That’s procreation, and one can argue that children born into poverty often have a tougher time getting out of poverty. Doesn’t the state have an interest in these children becoming productive citizens?
The state has no role in procreation. That’s a slippery slope that conservative and liberals should find common ground. You can’t argue in favor of getting the government out of the lives of consenting adults and then turn around and claim that the state wants more children.
I have better ideas. The state has an interest in prosperous workers, right? So why not raise the minimum wage? The state has an interest in public safety? So why not adopt tougher laws regarding the storage of dangerous chemicals such as those that destroyed the town of West? I don’t think those ideas are out of line especially if procreation is touted as a reason to ban gay marriages.