Rick Santorum Was Right: Meet the future of marriage in America.

National Review Online ^ | March 23, 2005 | Stanley Kurtz

[combat_boots]

Well, these are not Old Testament times, but Muslims live in the here and now. Currently, bigamy is illegal.

[Rutles4Ever]

This article is too depressing for me to read. I just can't do it.

America will not be the same in five years.

[aberaussie]

Polygamy goes back to the time of the Old Testament patriarchs. The polygamists have a stronger case than do the homosexuals.

Bingo. That is what I was thinking. Wonder how the ELCA will "make space" for this??

[Diddle E. Squat]

LOL, the casino concubine loophole.

[trebb]

Up to now, gay-marriage advocates like Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch have dismissed the analogy between homosexuality and polyamory by arguing that homosexuality is a far more deeply rooted impulse than the superficial, even frivolous, desire for sex with more than one partner.

And just how do they explain the hundreds of partners so many homosexuals boast of???

[macbee]

Up to now, gay-marriage advocates like Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch have dismissed the analogy between homosexuality and polyamory by arguing that homosexuality is a far more deeply rooted impulse than the superficial, even frivolous, desire for sex with more than one partner.

Yeah, good luck on that one, guys. By arguing with some success that these "impulses" (however "deeply rooted" they are) create rights, the gay rights activists won the first few rounds and now it's "Katie, bar the door!" Both polyamorists and paedophiles now have much of the leverage and precedent they need to get their own proclivities recognized and eventually legalized.

[John O]

No matter how educated they may be, a pervert is still just a pervert

[dannyboy72]

I guess all of the hideously ugly liberals out there who can't find a husband are hoping that if men can have multiple wives that they may find a man...

Same goes for all of the hideously ugly and intellectually bankrupt liberal men

[Inwoodian]

Baaaaaaah. I luuuuv ewe.

[hattend]

How, therefore can polygamist marriage be denied given this precedent

Laura Ingraham said pretty much the same thing on her show today. She said look at how Roe v Wade snowballed into what we have today and the Schiavo case will do the same thing.

The "nuclear family" will be unrecognizable in a generation.

[Just another Joe]

has published a major legal and cultural defense of polyamory (group marriage).

Polyamory and polygamy are not interchangeable.

Polyamory - participation in multiple and simultaneous loving or sexual relationships.
Polygamy - The condition or practice of having more than one spouse at one time.

The author uses them as if they were interchangeable.

Being polygamous makes you polyamorous but being polyamorous doesn't make you polygamous.

[Van Jenerette]

...more.

[Slings and Arrows]

I want to marry my Playstation /sarcasm>

If SC is a common-law state, I may already be married to Diablio II:LOD.

[bobjam]

The islamic rule regarding this isn't acceptable to these liberals because it's sexist and homophobic. Why can't a woman have five husbands? Therefore, so-called "forward" thinking progressives have come up with "polyamory" based on the following equation:

classic polygamy + feminism + lesbigay agenda = polyamory

It's only a matter of time before nambla gets added to the mix.

[Nowhere Man]

If SC is a common-law state, I may already be married to Diablio II:LOD.

Cool, you're into Diablo as well? I have D1 and D2 although I don't have LOD yet. In that case, I might be a polygamist. B-)

[Slings and Arrows]

I am addicted to DII:LOD. Mostly I play paladins and druids (and the occassional Amazon), single-player, untwinked (but with self-muling). Yes, I'm a glutton for punishment.

If you can, get LOD ASAP - all the new classes, goodies, etc., expand the scope of the game by orders of magnitude (not to mention that the larger playscreen is a great relief). D1 was a good game in its time, but compared to LOD it's definitely a "first wife." (I'm in trouble now, aren't I?)