Marriage discrimination struck down in Arkansas.

[Esquilax]

Your argument is essentially this:

Homosexual marriages are equal to heterosexual marriage because in this day and age procreation is not a purpose of marriage.

You are the one making the special pleading. You are citing this day and age as an exemption without justifying it.

We exist within the present day. It's a bit odd, being asked to justify the necessities of existing within our current world.

Our population...our society...depends on heterosexual unions.

Which is a pointless claim to make, as saying this A: doesn't reduce the number of non-hetero people that exist, B: seems to be arguing for a world of bare essentials where nothing not required can ever be recognized, and C: misses the point that it's reproduction that society depends on, not specifically hetero unions. There's nothing in the husband/wife set specifically that sustains society, and you know that.

This day and age is not an exemption. Our population....our society...does not depend on homosexual unions. It never has and I don't see how it ever will.

Still a pointless claim, and now you tack on an argument from personal incredulity.

Homosexual unions are not equivalent to heterosexual unions(unless there is a God who determines such)

What was it you were saying about assertions without justification earlier?

and that is a rational reason for the people of Arkansas to vote not to give it the same status. The judge's argument was wrong.

Premises invalid, and hence the conclusion doesn't follow. Next!

1. Gay couples don't need state recognized marriages to engage in life long loving relationships.

If marriage is so vestigial, and one doesn't require it for a relationship to work, then why do you care who gets to do it?

2. If homosexual marriages don't contribute to society to the same degree as heterosexual marriages that is a rational reason not to give it the same status.

By that logic we should start subtracting marriage rights from heterosexual marriages that don't yield children. Or is it that you don't actually care about this nonsense "contribution above all" argument?

3. The fertility rate in the US is well below that needed to sustain the population. Arkansas is just slightly below that needed to sustain the population.

Ever heard of surrogacy? IVF treatment? Or hell, just the fact that we have plenty of kids in need of adoption? Why is it that you think the pathway to more children is to try your hardest to make sure there's less stable families in the world?

1. Nobody is denied the right to marry a person of opposite sex. Nobody is being disenfranchised.

A transparent, sophistic dodge. Stop being dishonest, if you can.

2. Societies give special status to those institutions they hold value....there is nothing morally wrong with doing so.

Would you be saying the same if equal value is given to homosexual marriages? Because that's the way things are turning out.

More importantly, why would a theist be arguing for moral relativism?