another point

Interesting point brought up in the newspaper letters to the editor today. If marriage is solely an institution for procreation, what about the thousands and thousands of couples who have problems conceiving? How about the ones that can't and end up adopting children? Those children aren't biologically theirs, so those marriages are meaningless right? For people who are pro-life anti-gay if having a baby and giving it up for adoption is such a realistic and appropriate measure, then where do you think a lot of adopted children end up? Those adopting heterosexual couples aren't procreating. Are they defying God as well?