Of Course Gay Marriage Leads to Polygamy!

Irrational Knowledge ^ | December 23, 2005 | Justin

[Jibaholic]

Polygamy and incest are the ultimate wedge issues for supporters of gay marriage. Some oppose polygamy (here) while others support it (here and here).

The standard argument for gay marriage is that marriage is a basic civil right that should be available to all people. One problem with the standard argument is that it also applies to polygamy and incest. This backs gay marriage supporters into a corner. If they support polygamy and incest then they make the slippery slope argument of conservatives a reality. But if they oppose polygamy and incest they must drop the standard argument or become hypocrites.

Supporters of gay marriage have tried to create replacement arguments that draw a line between polygamy and gay marriage, but they are all much weaker than the standard argument. Here is a summary of polygamy-proof arguments for gay marriage:

Jealousy

In this argument (made here) gay marriage is advocated because "You commit to one person, and that person commits wholly to you. Second, the number isn't arbitrary. It's based on human nature. Specifically, on jealousy."

This is a strange argument. The only reason we human nature leads to jealousy is because it takes two people to reproduce. A third person can only break that reproductive unit. Either the husband will raise another man's child, or the mother will be abandoned by the father to another woman. Jealously only reinforces the biological basis of marriage. This is an argument for heterosexual marriage against both gay marriage and polygamy. Finally, the jealousy argument would support incestuous marriage, so it is only effective against polygamy.

Not a choice

Andrew Sullivan makes that point here. Polygamy really is a choice, whereas homosexuality is not. This does a nice job of creating a distinction that puts homosexual and heterosexual marriage on one side and polygamy on the other. However there are two problems with the "not a choice" argument.

But first some clarification. It may be the case that homosexuality is not a choice, but it is also the case that it is not genetic. The science behind the "gay gene" has withered (here) and only about 30% to 50% of identical twins of homosexuals are themselves homosexual (here).

The first problem with the "not a choice" argument is that while it prohibits polygamy, it allows other forms of marriage such as incest. No one would choose to fall in love with their sibling. Pedophiles and some rapists could make the claim that their sexual attraction is not a choice. Of course, pedophilia and rape can be disqualified because they do not involve sex between consenting adults - but this illustrates the fact that consenting adults is the important factor, not the lack of a choice.

A second problem with the "not a choice" argument is that lack of a choice is a poor basis for making the law. If X is objectively bad, then it should not matter whether people do X freely or compulsively. And if X is objectively good, then it also shouldn't matter. This leads to what is perhaps the most important of the non-standard arguments for gay marriage: whether or not gay marriages are objectively good.

Good of Society

This argument states that relationships that are good for society should be recognized as marriages, those that are negative should not (Dahlia Lithwick makes that point here, although it is hard to tease the substance of her argument from among the fireworks). Polygamy has three big problems. The first is that it leads to powerful men coercing young women and girls into marriage. The second is that it leads to powerful men viewing young men as a threat. It was only one generation after the founding of Mormon colonies that Blood Atonement against adolescent males began. The final problem is that high-status favored wives can gain more of the father's time and money for her children against the children of the lesser wives.

You can make just as strong - if not stronger - of an argument against homosexuality. Gays have much higher rates of domestic violence, STDs, substance abuse problems, and infidelity (some references here). Gay marriage supporters claim that this bad behavior is caused by intolerance and lack of legalized marriages. This is a difficult position to maintain because other discriminated and oppressed groups have had strong marriages, such as Asian immigrants and blacks in the first half of the 20th century. It was only after the civil rights movement that the black family disintegrated. Finally, consider the last time in history when homosexuality was legitimate, and when Christians were the subject of discrimination and oppression: the Roman Empire. Christians had strong monogamous marriages in stark contrast to Roman society around them (many people had literally dozens of wives). Even the famous Enlightenment critic of Christianity, Edward Gibbon, conceded in his book The 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', that Christianity restored the dignity of marriage.

We have decades of quality research showing what happens when you introduce non-biological parents into heterosexual families: higher rates of social maladies such as depression, substance abuse, promiscuity, low self-esteem, bad grades, and dropping out of school (see here). Although there are exceptions, this is the statistical pattern. It defies common sense to claim that gays are an exception to this rule, but that is precisely the argument they make.

Gay parenting is a fairly new phenomenon, and the research is very preliminary, much like the research on single motherhood back in the 1970's. Back then liberal sociologists believed that alternatives to traditional marriage were good for children (see here and here for articles that describe the change of mindset).

One of the main flaws of the early research on gay parents is that it suffers from a selection bias - researchers recruit volunteers rather than find random samples (here is an article in which it is argued that appeals case trials are more random than recruiting volunteers). Nevertheless, there is already plenty of research confirming that children raised by gay parents do worse (see here, here ). Supporters of gay marriage have been forced to massage the data (see here and here).

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Homosexuality should be treated similarly to alcoholism, or any other behavior that we are "genetically predisposed to." Bestiality is under the same umbrella, I'm sure.

[samm1148]

But the Volvo Republicans told me I was overreacting when I said that gay "rights" was the beginning of the slippery slope. Surely the moderates who gave conservatives last week's victories weren't lying?

[CharlesWayneCT]

Bump

[Reaganesque]

That, or a whole family of hair dressers.