LGBT couples procreate.

They adopt, but, they also procreate. Gay men have surrogates to carry their family depending on the financial resources and sometimes based on who their friends are. 

Lesbians use donated sperm and artificial insemination or sometimes otherwise if the desire is enough to seek intercourse with a man. It happens. That choice is also sometimes based in financial ability to conceive otherwise.

Why is the conversation about LGBT couples so sterile? It isn't serving the community to have ignorant people draw up laws based in procreation to qualify marriage. The entire idea of limiting couples to marry based on procreation is more hideous than most people like to realize.

There are LGBT couples that also have children from previous heterosexual marriages.

Quite frankly, any delineation of creating a special status on the idea of procreation is nothing more than bigotry. Religious to be exact. Just because LGBT couples are a challenge for some to get their minds around doesn't mean those seeking special status are correct. It simply means they are ignorant.

In all honesty, I don't see the reason for the discussion regarding procreation as necessary if the LGBT community are too modest to discuss it in the first place. But, the LGBT are parents and they aren't necessary adopted. As a matter of fact depending on whom's uterus and sperm are used in the conception sometimes creates custody issues with couples seeking a separation or divorce from each other. Marriage would end that. It would place both partners on the same status to children born to those relationships.

Some of this appears to be an aspiration to build the perfectly religious country. Heterosexual relationships, marriages exclusive rights to procreation, no abortion, no contraception.

DOMA and Prop 8 as well as the NC Amendment are very dangerous laws. Grossly inappropriate and do not reflect the reality of the country's populous.

DOMA and Proposition 8 have to be struck down. There is no valid argument to maintain their integrity. Every reason to do otherwise.

Let me state the obvious of the wayward demands of procreation to burden marriage in the USA. It is dangerous. That is not a valid definition.

Marriage is not about procreation. A citizen can procreate with and without a marriage license. A citizen may procreate, but, doesn't have to procreate. A citizen can decide to not procreate. Does that mean they don't marry? It is a hideous and dangerous faux face for bigotry.

There are slippery slopes all along the this discussion. If people marry because they have special status and don't procreate, but, yet the Supreme Court of the USA state Proposition 8 is a constitutional law, does that mean a citizen will be have demands to procreate outside their decision otherwise?

What happens then to the North Carolina Amendment which victimizes couples with children but are not married? This entire discussion can lead to 'child harvests' of people not married with children or couples married but not procreating within that relationship.

What if to maintain a married status a couple is demanded to have a child and they don't want children? Adoption, right? Bouy, that might even serve the adoption industry in a way they can only dream about.

The exclusion of marriage to a special status creates all kinds of problems. It is obviously unconstitutional to seek to regulate marriage.

Marriage is a privacy issue. It is no one's business who marries who or if they have a family. That is not the purview of government. Any laws that seek to regulate marriage is bigotry at its worse.