Active Users:307 Time:06/04/2025 09:09:46 PM
This, and legal recognition of it, is precisely why marriage has become an Equal Protection issue. Joel Send a noteboard - 22/10/2012 03:40:01 PM
I specifically said at the beginning of my post that I was trying to get into this argument. I wanted to get a sampling of opinions on polygamy from a group that is not hung up on the traditional view of marriage. The reason I specifically addressed supporters of gay marriage is because I know what most other people will say.

Lots of supporters of gay marriage affect an objective or even-handed position, when they are really just shilling for a special interest for the group with whom they sympathize. It is not really about "equality" and personal definitions and choices (since they are trying to strip everyone else of the right to choose to recognize their role-playing games as real or refuse the same), it is about obtaining a special privilege for homosexuals, which they agree with that group obtaining, whether out of sentiment or personal interest.

Marriage is a thing. You don't change its nature by adding a word to the label and making it appear that the true nature of the thing is actually only as aspect of the real nature. That is the view of proponents of marriage. The proponents of alternative domestic arrangements have their own agendas and are as beholden to them as anyone else. They will not be any more fair or impartial, because their reasons for their choice are just as personal and egocentric as anyone's.

People will always pick and choose what they do and do not recognize as valid. However, the Equal Protection Clause quite rightly forbids government doing so: The law must be the same for everyone, without prejudice. Advocates for LEGAL gay marriage, at least most of them, demand no "special" privilege for homosexuals, only that "no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States... nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

No one is suggesting homosexual marriage gain any benefits of inheritance, taxation, medical visitation/decisions etc. except those heterosexual marriage does. Under the Equal Protection Clause they are EQUALLY in/valid.

Religiously, the dangers of government regulating sacraments are precisely why the First Amendments Non-Establishment Clause exists; I see no reason to ignore and every reason to observe it. Legally, joint ownership and responsibility issues are so critical they "traditionally" preempted romance and religion.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
For all you supporters of Gay Marriage: What about polygamy? - 20/10/2012 12:02:06 AM 1418 Views
Legal rights. - 20/10/2012 12:14:10 AM 820 Views
It almost sounds like you are saying... - 20/10/2012 12:31:40 AM 795 Views
That is what I'm saying it. - 20/10/2012 01:07:50 AM 776 Views
Technically, privileges, not rights. - 20/10/2012 04:16:45 AM 780 Views
Sure - 20/10/2012 12:35:53 AM 712 Views
All for it... For adults over the age of 18. *NM* - 20/10/2012 01:18:04 AM 422 Views
What about it? - 20/10/2012 01:21:17 AM 777 Views
+1 *NM* - 20/10/2012 01:51:25 AM 449 Views
+2 *NM* - 20/10/2012 11:18:39 AM 397 Views
should be legal, would be nice for poly people. should include polygyny and polyandry. *NM* - 20/10/2012 03:29:05 AM 400 Views
poly people? - 20/10/2012 12:44:01 PM 742 Views
Government needs to stop legislating morality. So yes *NM* - 20/10/2012 03:36:37 AM 386 Views
That's a huge chunk of what government does. - 20/10/2012 04:35:45 PM 748 Views
That's not what I'm saying - 21/10/2012 03:21:08 AM 769 Views
So you're opposed to abortion and gun control then? Welcome aboard! - 21/10/2012 06:14:14 AM 721 Views
Why do you keep talking about gay marriage and polygamy in the same sentence.. - 20/10/2012 03:58:26 AM 786 Views
Get a grip. Your response is just what I tried to avoid. - 20/10/2012 04:33:40 AM 712 Views
The more fool you. - 21/10/2012 05:55:30 AM 807 Views
This, and legal recognition of it, is precisely why marriage has become an Equal Protection issue. - 22/10/2012 03:40:01 PM 739 Views
Ha! Point. *NM* - 20/10/2012 05:40:34 AM 586 Views
Marriage is always a choice, whatever the motive(s.) - 22/10/2012 04:00:40 PM 741 Views
I got no opinion on it. - 20/10/2012 12:51:43 PM 839 Views
The idea of a group marriage makes me uncomfortable - 20/10/2012 04:19:48 PM 715 Views
As long as it is equitable - 20/10/2012 05:55:57 PM 712 Views
The state shouldn't even recognize marriage beyond name changes anyway - 21/10/2012 03:52:40 AM 787 Views
Indeed - 21/10/2012 06:04:41 AM 844 Views
I don't give a damn what you call it. That's your business. - 21/10/2012 06:17:40 AM 1116 Views
And so? - 21/10/2012 07:05:08 AM 739 Views
Re: And so? - 21/10/2012 04:10:19 PM 923 Views
Legal contracts must be open to all consenting adults, or none. - 22/10/2012 03:11:55 PM 802 Views
You are correct, yet your reasoning is flawed. - 23/10/2012 03:20:25 PM 718 Views
Again, the Equal Protection Clause has far less force on private entities than on government. - 23/10/2012 03:52:06 PM 658 Views
Much less force, yes. - 23/10/2012 04:15:03 PM 663 Views
The crux is "If it's my business, it's my business." - 23/10/2012 04:43:25 PM 738 Views
+1 *NM* - 23/10/2012 07:36:46 PM 332 Views
No the analogy is not exact, nor legally the same... - 23/10/2012 07:33:25 PM 631 Views
Analogy is not equality, only similarity. - 24/10/2012 04:37:29 PM 835 Views
We aren't asking for something better or different. - 23/10/2012 04:27:04 PM 720 Views
yeah, it is very circular. - 23/10/2012 07:44:33 PM 758 Views

Reply to Message