Alejandro, this is very late and I only now watched this interesting show, but I think Sarah talked about love in a broad way not limited to romantic love or to the fleeting experience of falling in love, which has a time-clock built into it. Your rich experience describes I think what Sara was advocating: love as a choice, a commitment, a responsibility, a sacrifice. I think Sarah's broader point was that these more mature kinds of levels of love can be learned with either gender AND with or without children. I think an implication of what Sarah says is that preserving marriage for its reproductive value actually keeps the debate limited, and more importantly, alienates very important parts of what it means to be human since being human is not limited to procreating. It may include reproducing like all other animals, but being co-creative seems to me a more inclusive and helpful goal: co-creative with friends, family, self, the earth and God. Because we have a physical body AND and an intellect, a psyche and a soul, reproducing in all these levels of life and love will get us to the happiness that so many beings like the Dalai Lama and Rumi embody. We can take a cue from them in fact. These wise beings were sometimes married and sometimes not. They sometimes had children and sometimes not. The odds are, (and research bears this out) some of these saints and sages were homosexuals, transvestites, transgendered, bisexual or some other subaltern category. What a wonderful world we live in.
More information about text formats