If we were to be in the business of REdefining marriage to suit the homosexuals?
What is the legal or moral reason the homosexuals might give to not allow polygamist marriage? If you say ‘none’ and you are for polygamist marriage do you realize the absolute never-ending nightmare of property and parental rights cases due to polygamist divorce? But all are consenting adults, so how dare you stop them?
If we say we must redefine historical marriage to suit some newcomers, what is then the argument to stop all newcomers? We already scrapped the historical basis, so any objections after the fact have no defense.
It is called Pandora’s box. Historically it has been left for reasons additional to the obvious (family = mommy + daddy.)
Even if you were to ’split the baby’ so to speak and say polygamists cannot jointly share property, then that is not *actually* marriage (all new faux-civil rights mobs to look forward to, bigot!)
Also, polygamy is part of a society which demeans women.
How do we stop this historical rewriting of marriage, its consequences and ensuing injustice?
The point is what is your justification for ‘discriminating’ against polygamists? Simply defining marriage as a two-person institution does not give a REASON for leaving them out. We know it would complicate the courts but that is not a LEGAL REASON. If not allowing ‘gay marriage’ is discrimination then not allowing polygamist marriage (which actually has a historical background) is discrimination also and you must find a legal reason otherwise.
Related Blogs
- Related Blogs on Gay Marriage
- Gay marriage and unintended consequences » GetReligion
- Guitar Hero 4
- Related Blogs on Justification
- St. Joseph's Vanguard And Our Lady's Train » Blog Archive …
- Forensic Friday: Warfield on Justification
- Related Blogs on Moral Reason
Related Blogs
- Related Blogs on Gay Marriage
- Gay marriage and unintended consequences » GetReligion
- Nightclub Lizard Lounge Dallas
- Related Blogs on Justification
- St. Joseph's Vanguard And Our Lady's Train » Blog Archive …
- Forensic Friday: Warfield on Justification
- Related Blogs on Moral Reason
a lot of words that don’t mean a thing. wtf are you talking about. believe what you want and let others do the same stacia marie born 12/7/09
How about the people that want to marry their horse, goat , cow, or chimpanzee? Should we not allow them into the marriage syndrome and include all parties into the legal system of marriage.. Perhaps that will allow new jobs for Animal marriage lawyers? If you say no, why are you discriminating against those people? Think this idea is bizzarr? You had better start doing some checking before you start making the statements you have just made. Kibber
The main reason polygamist marriage isn’t allowed today is because it allows people to take advantage of various marital benefits. Define marriage as between two consenting adults, and voila, there is no problem. TotalSolipsist
“…polygamy is part of a society which demeans women.” – If all persons enter into the marriage with full knowledge and consent, how is this demeaning? What if it’s one woman and two men? What about 2 women and 2 men? It’s like saying that the business of stripping is demeaning to women, when we all know it is really demeaning to men (who are the ones that pay a lot of money and thing they are going to “get lucky” and then walk out of the bar alone?).
And historically, until not too long ago, interracial marriages were wrong, but civilization did not fall apart when it became allowed and more common than it use to.
I’m a heterosexual in a man-woman marriage, and I am not threatened by gays that want to marry. I think they should be allowed. It will have no effect on my marriage in any way. I’m not going to run out and marry a man and my wife is not going to marry a woman. Mutt