After being deluged for weeks with opinions for and against
marriage equality, it seems opponents' most convincing argument
against Question 6 was that two people of the same sex cannot
produce children. The implication is that such couples therefore
should not be allowed to marry, and that permitting them to do
so corrupts the whole institution of marriage.  If procreation
were the primary purpose of marriage, a strong case could be
made for restricting marriage to heterosexual couples. However,
one wonders then why traditional marriage vows make no mention
of children or procreation.  Instead, they focus upon the
couple's love for and devotion to one another, which can be
equally valid for either homosexuals or heterosexuals. If having
children is the primary justification for couples to marry, I
would expect the marriage vows to at least acknowledge that
fact.  Since they do not, it's a stretch to infer that gays and
lesbians should not be allowed to wed because they cannot have
children. In my view, and a