When at first you don’t succeed, try the same tired argument that has lost dozens of times before:
Attorneys for the state are telling a federal judge there’s a good reason Arizona won’t let gays marry: They can’t reproduce, at least not without the help of a third person. Papers filed in federal court defending the ban say voters, in approving the constitutional amendment in 2008, are entitled to “define marriage for their community.” But the lawyers also are arguing to U.S. District Court Judge John Sedwick there’s a public purpose in the state getting into the business of regulating private relationships: Ensuring that children are, whenever possible, raised by a biological mother and biological father.
“Only man-woman couples are capable of furthering the state’s interest in linking children to both of their biological parents,” argued attorneys from the Alliance Defending Freedom. And they said the vast majority of such couples produce their own biological children. But gay marriages, the lawyers said, “do not advance that compelling state interest” because they “can never provide a child with both her biological mother and her biological father.” About the closest they can come, the legal papers argue, is by involving a third person who will be a biological parent.
And the Alliance Defending Children KNOWS about biological children. (Tipped by JMG reader Homer)