>A species has to reproduce to survive, obviously.
>
>But it's the goal of the species, not every individual.
>
>Not every single member of the species is capable of, wants
>to, plans to, or should reproduce.
>
>
>Using his argument, marriage is only justified if the couple
>is capable and planning to have kids. And I guess there would
>be a window to have kids, and if you don't have them, your
>marriage gets dissolved.
>

Marriage is a human institution. It was developed to offer a stable protective environment to the offspring of a MAN and a WOMAN. To provide a level of structure to a society and its family units.

BEES have a totally different social structure. You would have to study and examine closely their species-specific structure to find any deviant activity that goes on within it. Odds are, that if there were any activities that some BEES would "choose" to take part in, that was antithetical to the hives prime objective (to reproduce), that that activity would lead those BEES involved in it to a path of extinction because it is against what they were put on the planet to do.

If some BEES started a movement where they "choose" (there goes that word again!) to not pollinate flowers, what ramifications does that have across all of nature?


...

my thoughts,

peace.


----------------------------------
"BE, not foolish, as temporary king of the mountaintop."
-Com's Pops, BE 2006