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.

Marriage is not a State's Right issue. Marriage applies to all the citizens. It is not an exclusive focus of only California. 

If the Supreme Court plays politics with Proposition 8 it is incompetent. It is not the place of the Supreme Court to politicize any case before them. That is legal malpractice. 

Deferring to the 'political process' to play out is not a constitutional right. The Vote is a constitutional right. The political process is not a constitutional process.

Politics falls under Freedom of Speech, but, there is no constitutional right to politics in the USA.

For Alito to state this is a new political dilemma is blatant malpractice. The reality of LGBT is as old as the species itself. Alito is showing his bigoted side. Just that simple. There are vast amounts of information about the prevalence of LGBT through history, including ancient history. Alito is biasing his opinion by even raising such bigoted remarks during the hearings.

Marriage is not defined by the Bible. The biblical definition can be interpreted by many denominations of religions for the practice of faith, but, faith has nothing to do with marriage; not at the level of government; not in the USA. 

If the practice of faith discriminates between whom is fit and whom is not fit to marry for the sake of procreation that my be a doctrine of the religion or a dogma of some kind, but, there is nothing legal about that definition. When faiths discriminate based on procreation it is about raising numbers of members based on birth and not participation. The merits of that are interestingly debated, but, are not important here.