Human-like in appearence, but should we allow marriage based on little more than this?

Well, this article certainly gives the childish explession "if you like it so much, why dont you marry it?" a whole new meaning. The idea is that by 2050, marriage with robots will be legalized, and and these vows could even be consumated. I however, find this notion mildly ridiculous, and some what insulting. As a catholic, my first issue with this concept is a religious one. If the main purpose of sex is for procreation, sex with robots should be considered a sin. I also find David Levy, an artificial intelligence researcher's, little faith in humanity and our intelligence mildly disturbing. He says "once you have a story like 'I had sex with a robot, and it was great!' appear someplace like Cosmo magazine, I'd expect many people to jumo on the bandwagon". I find this notion insulting, as just because Cosmo says something, doesn't mean humanity is going to fall over themselves and belieive it.

Another argument of Levy's I had a problem with was his argument due to some research proving that students at times would become unusually attracted to a program named ELIZA. Attraction is not even close to love, and attraction in itself will not cause someone to marry. It is hard enough for man women to get their significant others to commit to marriage, and women are actually capable of loving the man who they marry, and the other way around.

Personally, I completely beleive that saying "love and sex with robots are inevitable" are very highly presumtuous statements.
Levy is right in arguing that psychologists have identified some reasons why people fall in love, and he says that "almost all of them could apply to human-robot relationships", but what about the reasons that can't apply? And who is to say that psychologists have identified all the reasons that people fall in love? Sure certian reasons can be programed into a robot, but all of these reasons are just that - programmed into the robot. There is a contradiction in Levy's theory, as he says that one reason people fall in love is if they know the other person likes them. Well if a person programs a robot to like them, woiuldn't they still be aware that the robot doesn't actually like them? And would this not in turn completely void that argument for Levy? Also, if we are simply programming these robots to be compatible with people, aren't we just creating the perfect stepford wife or husband? This stepford theory has been tested with little success, so what chance does robotic marriage have?

I also felt some sympathy for interracial and gay couples, as Levy uses them mearly as a means to express himself. He compares marriage to robots with marriage of interracial and gay couple, and i find this appauling. Gay and interracial couples have things in common. FOr one, the species involved; this is just not the case in robot marriages.

I do agree with alot of the author's ethical issues that are brought up, and think that his arguments are weak, and unsupported. His example about a wife claiming to ahve a headache, sending her husband to have sex with his robot is absolutely absurd. This concept takes the romance out of sex, and takes both the romance and intamacy out of marriage. Ronald Arkin claims that "there's a real potential for intimacy here, where humans become psychologically and emotionally attatched to these devices in ways we wouldn't do a vibrator". Is this really a good thing?
I have no issue with the fact that people may be having sex with robots in the future, in fact people are having sex with robots (well robotic equiptment anyway)even presently, but I have to consider the same point Arkin considered, being if we get this close to robots, what will happen to our social fabric? If people are in marriages with robots, infidelity is no longer an issue, as you can simply program your mechanical wife or husband to tolerate this infidelity. What will this do to morals?
I was absolutely disgusted by the point considering pedaphilia, and prostitution. Letting pedophiles use children robots is like allowing pornography portraying pedaphilia, only much much worse. The whole concept is absolutely sickening. Arkin's question based on robot ethics, and what we should consider ethical treatment of these robots, but where will it end? Will robots be able to marry robots? And if a robot commits a crime, do we send them to trial?
If a robot is malfunctional, should we have laws keeping it working?
This article proves nothing more than the laziness of humanity. People no longer want to go out on dates, meet someone the old fashined way adn call them back for further dates, which could then lead to marriage. It is so much easier to buy a robotic bride, and skip the whole courting process.
The whole notion of this article is completely ridiculous, and the fact that we are even seriously talking about this happening just shows how devestating the future for marriage is looking.

This video demonstrates the absurdity of robot-robot marriages, which would probably be one of the next steps after legalizing human-robot marriage. Yeara ago, people would have claimed marriage to robots absolutely impossible, but this article proves that this isn't the case anymore, for some people. with this in mind, who is to say robot-robot marriage will never happen?