S
Sipetradayni
Guest
Of course, they can! In the past or I think there are only a few couples who get married before they knew they are sterile or not 
- Status
A
Alex337
Guest
Now I’m super confused. If they can’t procreate then surely it’s not a real marriage, right?Of course, they can! In the past or I think there are only a few couples who get married before they knew they are sterile or not
S
Sipetradayni
Guest
They have all it takes to procreate but only not yet meant to be. Marriage isn’t always equal to family.
A
Alex337
Guest
Both of my grandmothers had their uteris’s removed due to childhood cancers; they didn’t have all it took to procreate by any means.
S
Sipetradayni
Guest
Is one of them really your grandmother? How come?
A
Alex337
Guest
Both of them are really my grandmothers. Both of my parents were adopted (thus two grandmothers both unable to reproduce, it was an odd turn of luck).Is one of them really your grandmother? How come?
S
Sipetradayni
Guest
It’s kinda funny but you have a point: What if a woman already knows that she can’t conceive but still wants to get married? I think that’s what you are trying to say. Hmmm…
A
Alex337
Guest
Yep. My grandmothers both married and adopted, it worked out well for those two families. I will always think marriage is about more than procreation.
S
Sipetradayni
Guest
I think it’s still procreation not in terms of physical one but procreation in essence and that is – nurturing.
A
Alex337
Guest
Perhaps. Though I will freely admit I suppose same sex marriage and believe many can be very nurturing.
And some married couples won’t provide a home for children for a myriad of reasons; they may not be in a stable position, they may face challenges that make it impractical, they may not be the kind of folks who want kids. I know one married couple where the wife is disabled, they could physically have children but it would be impractical to do so as the wife requires full time care as is. I’d say that relationship is still nurturing, though not in a way that creates a home for a next generation.
And some married couples won’t provide a home for children for a myriad of reasons; they may not be in a stable position, they may face challenges that make it impractical, they may not be the kind of folks who want kids. I know one married couple where the wife is disabled, they could physically have children but it would be impractical to do so as the wife requires full time care as is. I’d say that relationship is still nurturing, though not in a way that creates a home for a next generation.
S
Sipetradayni
Guest
Everyone needs a relationship that’s really nurturing but gay marriage is another story
P
PetraG
Guest
This may surprise you, but being incapable of engaging in sexual intercourse is an impediment to marriage.
As for being sterile, Elizabeth and other women were often thought to be sterile, so that judgement isn’t made. As Mother Teresa once put it, “God has not called me to be successful; He has called me to be faithful.”
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
Being sterile is not an impediment to marriage. Being unable permanently and incurably to engage in normal marital intercourse is an impediment to marriage. (Obviously that requires sexual complementarity.)
F
Fauken
Guest
Yes, sterility and impotency are not the same. The latter would disqualify one for marriage, the former wouldn’t.
A
Alex337
Guest
That does surprise me. I just don’t get why some folks are so very obsessed with sex. I mean I’m glad folks enjoy it, but to make it the defining thing of a marriage seems to be taking things a tad far.Alex337:
This may surprise you, but being incapable of engaging in sexual intercourse is an impediment to marriage.
As for being sterile, Elizabeth and other women were often thought to be sterile, so that judgement isn’t made. As Mother Teresa once put it, “God has not called me to be successful; He has called me to be faithful.”
A
Alex337
Guest
Which I find to be telling. It shows it’s not about procreation, it’s just about sex even if procreation isn’t going to happen. Call me crazy but I’d rather marriage be concerned with the people being in love, have compatible personalities, and be dedicated to each other than to worry whether or not they can have sex in a specific manner.
A
Alex337
Guest
I dunno. I mean the ones I know are very nurturing, one literally saved a life.Everyone needs a relationship that’s really nurturing but gay marriage is another story
Seems good to me.
F
Fauken
Guest
Sure, love is important. But it can’t be marriage if it simultaneously denies the natural, necessary aspect of it. And before you bring up other religions, I don’t care what they teach. There is only one truth about it that matters.
A
Alex337
Guest
Follow up question; do you think a marriage is valid without love between the two people?Alex337:
Sure, love is important. But it can’t be marriage if it simultaneously denies the natural, necessary aspect of it. And before you bring up other religions, I don’t care what they teach. There is only one truth about it that matters.
F
Fauken
Guest
Can you please define precisely what you mean by love before I answer that?
- Status