Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy ?
RealClearPolitics.com ^ | 01/19/2006 | Debra Saunders

Posted on 01/20/2006 7:06:27 AM PST by SirLinksalot

Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy?

By Debra Saunders

When social conservatives argue that legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to legalized polygamy, same-sex marriage advocates either laugh or sneer. It's a scare tactic, they say. It'll never happen.

Last year, however, as Canada legalized same-sex marriage, Prime Minister Paul Martin commissioned a $150,000 study to debunk the polygamy argument. Big mistake: The study confirmed the scare tactic by recommending that Canada repeal its anti-polygamy law.

It also suggested that a legal challenge to Canada's anti-polygamy laws would succeed. "Why criminalize behavior?" asked Martha Bailey, one of the study's three law-professor authors. "We don't criminalize adultery."

Confession time: I am one of those who, for years, has argued that legalizing same-sex marriage would not open the door for polygamy. The limit for marriages would remain two, I argued. Two doesn't mean three or four.

Wrong. In these politically correct times, do-gooders expand definitions until words -- or institutions -- lose all meaning. Marriage can mean what you want it to mean.

And: If you don't prosecute all crimes in a category, you can't prosecute one.

That's essentially what Bailey argued.

The study recognized the "strong association between polygamy and gender inequality." Then the authors apparently decided that Canadian law should eliminate any legal unfairness -- in inherently unequal marriages.

One Kuwaiti wife can't move to Canada to live with her husband and another wife. That's unfair to the wife and unfair to Muslims. The study noted, "The parties most likely to suffer from this rule are the left-behind wives." To eliminate that inequity, these professors are ready to provide legal cover for all polygamous (and polyandrous) marriages.

"There's a logical extension to it," laughed Rob Stutzman, who worked on the Proposition 22 campaign in 2000, a measure that limited marriage in California to a union between a man and a woman. "If you accept the premise that marriage should be whatever relationships people want to enter into," he said, polygamy is legit.

Brad Luna of the Human Rights Campaign, which supports same-sex marriage, finds any linkage of polygamy to same-sex marriage "offensive." He warned against reading too much into one Canadian study. In America, he said, "two people is the defining element in our system of government on contractual marriage."

Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who has pushed for same-sex marriage in California, noted "a unique nature of a relationship with two. If you go beyond two, you can't draw a line anywhere else that isn't arbitrary." I agree, but the Canadian study gives me pause. The authors use a very American argument: that adults already are living in de facto polygamous relationships, so why make their arrangements illegal?

The answer is that even if authorities cannot and should not jail adults for group cohabitation, the state should not extend legal protections to those unions.

Extending marital protections to same-sex couples bestows equality. Extending protections to unequal unions protects inequality.

The Washington Times interviewed polygamous Mormons who argued they lead happy, harmonious lives. That may be, but the practice is poison for cultures at large. Rich men marry many wives. Poor men do not. Women have few opportunities and limited rights. It can't be good for the kids. Consider polygamy's most famous son: Osama bin Laden, whose father sired 54 children with 22 wives.

Many elites argue that Canada is 10 years ahead of America when it comes to gay rights. But when legal scholars are so progressive that they are willing to shove marriage back to the Stone Age, they reveal a culture with a death wish.

American advocates for same-sex marriage may want to reconsider supporting civil unions in lieu of same-sex marriage. Or some way to limit marriage to two adults.

This isn't the nanny state. It's the opposite. If you want to keep the government out of family life, don't legalize marriages that, when they dissolve, split property (and kids) between one husband and three wives.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gay; homosexualagenda; lawrencevtexas; legalized; pansexuals; polygamy; samesex; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last
Folks,

The liberal strategy is desensitization.... present every single aberrant lifestyle as really "normal", present it in the media as such, and slowly let the rest of America get used to it.

Expect Hollywood to make a film similar to Barebuck Mountain that celebrates and is sympathetic the joys of Polygamy at the same time damning middle America for intolerance. The subtle message will be ... DON'T YOU SEE THE HELL YOU ARE PUTTING THESE GOOD AND DECENT PEOPLE TO BY REFUSING TO RECOGNIZE AND LEGALIZE THEIR "normal" RELATIONSHIP(s) ?

Then, expect another Oscar and Golden Globe multi-award for the same film and expect it to be the talk of the town in PEOPLE's MAGAZINE.

You read it here first.

1 posted on 01/20/2006 7:06:29 AM PST by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Its all in the playbook of subversion:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1561529/posts


2 posted on 01/20/2006 7:08:10 AM PST by Vaquero ("An armed society is a polite society" Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy?"

Of course. And the NAMBLA/ACLU characters want same sex adult/child unions also.


3 posted on 01/20/2006 7:11:16 AM PST by FormerACLUmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Why wouldn't it? If it is determined by some court (and then upheld by SCOTUS) that the "equal protection" clause prohibits discrimination in marriage laws to allow gay marriage, how could it not be held to also allow polygamist marriages?


4 posted on 01/20/2006 7:12:48 AM PST by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Also, one of my big disappointments when Gavin Newsome and SF were handing out marriage licenses to any gay couple that wanted them was that some polygamists didn't attempt to also get marriage licenses. Would have been an interesting situation had their requests been denied.


5 posted on 01/20/2006 7:14:18 AM PST by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
In these politically correct times, do-gooders expand definitions until words -- or institutions -- lose all meaning. Marriage can mean what you want it to mean.

**************

Exactly. This is one of the reasons that morality can only originate with God.

6 posted on 01/20/2006 7:14:20 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

It's just as easy to redefine quantity as gender. Anyone claiming that one is obvious and the other is over the line is kidding themselves. Particularly in a society where one single court case can plow under any and all precedent with a ruling from the bench.


7 posted on 01/20/2006 7:15:04 AM PST by atomicpossum (Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord

Just curious, isn't polygamy already legal? I mean if not how do they get away with it in Utah? I'm not being facetious, I've always wondered how Mormons could get away with polygamy but in any other state if a guy is married to two women he gets arrested. Any one know?


8 posted on 01/20/2006 7:17:21 AM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

I'm sure some fundementalist Mormons are hoping it will. They've been skirting the polygamy laws for decades.


9 posted on 01/20/2006 7:18:43 AM PST by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Why criminalize behavior?" asked Martha Bailey, one of the study's three law-professor authors.




Sounds like an open invitation to burglarize this person's house and assault them. After all, why criminalize behavior? Just because she doesn't get aroused by such actions doesn't mean no one does. Everyone's lifestyle is equally valid.


10 posted on 01/20/2006 7:19:29 AM PST by Little Pig (Is it time for "Cowboys and Muslims" yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blaquebyrd

Currently, they usually have one legal marriage, then the rest of the wives are married "in the eyes of God" but not with the State.

Polygamy is still illegal, and Mormons have been prosecuted in the past for it.


11 posted on 01/20/2006 7:20:05 AM PST by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

<<<<
Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy ?
>>>>

Sounds like a good question to ask presidential candidate, Mitt Romney. After all, his prophet had many wives.


12 posted on 01/20/2006 7:22:06 AM PST by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Why criminalize behavior?" I love it when LIBERALS talk, they can show us some REAL GENUINE STUPIDIDTY! But seriously folks. I have a goat that I'm VERY fond of. Can I just take him to canada and make it all legal and stuff? lol


13 posted on 01/20/2006 7:22:12 AM PST by Jazzman1 (lol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
It seems obvious that polygamy will be just around the corner. As you mention the media I start trying to recall what new sexual perversions are being brought to the surface. Maybe it will be incest that is next or beastiality. What have we seen lately on TV? I remember when gays were a joke on TV and now it is a lifestyle. What is in the joke state now?

SNL has joked about incest quite a bit and they have also joked about child molestation. That's where it starts, then the jokes become more detailed and more frequent.

14 posted on 01/20/2006 7:24:36 AM PST by countorlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

ping


15 posted on 01/20/2006 7:26:46 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy ?"

What on earth would be the rationale for NOT allowing it?
Now that we're cruising into the post-JudeoChristian era?
Well, here's a look at what awaits us, as we rush back to the good
old days that proceeded the strictures imposed by the Judeo-Christian
model for the homebuilding unit--
WARNING: ADULT content in linked article:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0003.html


16 posted on 01/20/2006 7:27:48 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

They ask why not legalize polygamy??!! Geez, do they think employers will cover two, three, five spouses? Or that the government will extend social security benefits to that many? Do they all jointly own the house, the checking account? What about foreign marriage? Can a bunch of jihadis get second, third or fourth marriages to American lefties and get free passes here? Do we really want third-worlders bringing their four wives here? I don't understand how people CAN'T see the complications. Much worse than gay marriage, IMO, once you get past the ick factor.




17 posted on 01/20/2006 7:30:21 AM PST by blueminnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Brad Luna of the Human Rights Campaign, which supports same-sex marriage, finds any linkage of polygamy to same-sex marriage "offensive." He warned against reading too much into one Canadian study. In America, he said, "two people is the defining element in our system of government on contractual marriage."

LOL!! IOW, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander!

A young co-worker once asked me what I had against gay marriage. I responded by asking her what she had against pedophilia. "Ewwwwwwwwww! That's sick!" was her answer, to which I replied, "Exactly."

18 posted on 01/20/2006 7:34:02 AM PST by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueminnesota
Geez, do they think employers will cover two, three, five spouses?

According to Forbes some 460 of 500 of the top companies are all too eager to cover same sex marriages. This is bound to cost a fortune in insurance and retirement, and other costs but they are all too eager for those bright, creative, sensitive, well groomed gay people to be on the payroll.

19 posted on 01/20/2006 7:36:32 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

And why stop at polygamy, why not allow incestuous marriage or marriage between children and adults?


20 posted on 01/20/2006 7:37:33 AM PST by Diva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diva

Then comes beastiality.


21 posted on 01/20/2006 7:39:13 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Expect Hollywood to make a film similar to Barebuck Mountain that celebrates and is sympathetic the joys of Polygamy at the same time damning middle America for intolerance. The subtle message will be ... DON'T YOU SEE THE HELL YOU ARE PUTTING THESE GOOD AND DECENT PEOPLE TO BY REFUSING TO RECOGNIZE AND LEGALIZE THEIR "normal" RELATIONSHIP(s) ?"

'Polyamory' and open relationships already have much more acceptance than they did only a short time ago. It's certainly not a stretch to envisage something like that happening in the next ten years.


22 posted on 01/20/2006 7:41:40 AM PST by rightwinggoth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord

Or incestuous marriages? The logic works the same. I believe this is called the "slippery slope".


23 posted on 01/20/2006 7:42:17 AM PST by RedEyeJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: countorlock

"This is bound to cost a fortune in insurance and retirement, and other costs but they are all too eager for those bright, creative, sensitive, well groomed gay people to be on the payroll."

Or else they're terrified not to be seen as such.


24 posted on 01/20/2006 7:42:33 AM PST by rightwinggoth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: countorlock

Yes, I want to marry my 16 year old dog so I can get $1,000,000 insurance on my 16 year old legal wife.


25 posted on 01/20/2006 7:44:23 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (“Don't approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the back, or a Fool from any side.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rightwinggoth
Or else they're terrified not to be seen as such.

Yes, that is quite true. If a big corporation is doing business with another big corporation, then when on buckles the other will probably follow suit. GE and Boeing could probably lead half of the Fortune 500 companies all by themselves.

26 posted on 01/20/2006 7:45:32 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Wow, Somebody else that knows the meaning of polyandry, and uses it correctly, my hat's off to you sir!

One small caveat, Mormon's do not practice polygamy, we have a basic tenant of our church that says we obey the laws of the land (those who violate it are excommunicated).

Religion trolls: No bashing here, I am a Mormon, I know what my church teaches, I have seen people excommunicated for this, if you want to argue what I believe, join the church first, and I'll see you on Sunday.


27 posted on 01/20/2006 7:45:40 AM PST by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Yes, I want to marry my 16 year old dog so I can get $1,000,000 insurance on my 16 year old legal wife.

Good idea, you can also leave your fortune to your spouse when you die and have said spouse remarry one of your kids allowing a tax free transfer of your fortune.

28 posted on 01/20/2006 7:46:55 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Polygamy is, indeed, the follow-up to gay-marriage in the liberal assault on our values. If Gay marriage is allowed then no court in the land can reasonably stand against polygamy.


29 posted on 01/20/2006 7:47:49 AM PST by PeterFinn (Anita Bryant was right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterFinn

but I thought no one cared what people did in their own bedroom?

oh that's right, we only care when it's a man that marries more than one woman.

man sleeping with 100 women... ok.
man sleeping with another man... ok.
man sleeping with 100 men... ok.

man marrying 2 women ... go to jail, don't pass go.


30 posted on 01/20/2006 7:48:47 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Frankly, I'd much rather have legalized polygamy than legalized homosexual marriage, or even widespread divorce.


31 posted on 01/20/2006 7:48:53 AM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: countorlock
According to Forbes some 460 of 500 of the top companies are all too eager to cover same sex marriages.

Yet ironically, CEO's want to start firing people for smoking.

32 posted on 01/20/2006 7:49:18 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Governments want to copy all the data on you in existence, but will prosecute you for an mp3 copied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Little Pig
There's a difference between an action that only effects the consenter to it and an action that impinges on an unwilling party; c'mon don't give the other side straw men. A much more difficult argument to refute is that if one wants to regard the Old Testament as consisting of valid laws and modes of living then there seems to be a fair amount of polygamy recorded.
Besides, I think polygamy (and polyandry - one woman several men) would be it's own punishment:-) I for one don't care a whit; no laws, societal pressures nor anything other than the character of the parties involved make or break a marriage. just my .02
33 posted on 01/20/2006 7:52:33 AM PST by RedStateRocker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Yet ironically, CEO's want to start firing people for smoking.

I guess it's not about logic, it's about trendiness.

On the other hand, they must feel gay employees will add more than they take away which is certainly true with any other motivated worker. Gays are very motivated.

34 posted on 01/20/2006 7:53:32 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: blaquebyrd; Yo-Yo; SirLinksalot

>>I've always wondered how Mormons could get away with polygamy but in any other
>> state if a guy is married to two women he gets arrested.

Mormon's do not practice polygamy, we have a basic tenant of our church that says we obey the laws of the land (those who violate it are excommunicated).

Those who practice polygamy are NOT Mormons (a nick name anyway), they call themselves fundamentalists.

They are fugitives who marry the first “Legally” then the others in their church, Legally they are cohabitating, until common law makes them married legally.

That’s when they become fugitives.


35 posted on 01/20/2006 7:54:04 AM PST by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: countorlock
LOL, Even though I am 67, The odds are I will outlive any 16 year old dog.
And no one could get mad at me for calling my "wife" a b!tch.
36 posted on 01/20/2006 7:54:19 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (“Don't approach a Bull from the front, a Horse from the back, or a Fool from any side.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: conservative physics

Our society has some pretty strange standards, sometimes. It used to be:

Man sleeping with 100 women = stud
woman sleeping with 100 men = slut


37 posted on 01/20/2006 7:54:53 AM PST by RedStateRocker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
I diagree with a lot of this article, strongly disagree!!

"Extending marital protections to same-sex couples bestows equality. Extending protections to unequal unions protects inequality."

Neither bestows equality! Both protect inequality. Both are causes of the destruction of families and the moral erosion of American culture. Both encourage selfish, erotic, and irresponsible behaviors and lifestyles. Both are a detriment to society at large, both are emotionally and mentally detrimental to children.

38 posted on 01/20/2006 7:56:03 AM PST by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
"'Why criminalize behavior?' asked Martha Bailey, one of the study's three law-professor authors."

This woman is a law-professor???

And people are giving serious attention to her "study"???

Uh...I hate to have to tell you this, Martha, but...uh...murder, rape, torture, enslavement, assault with a deadly weapon, child molestation, blowing up skyscrapers, derailing trains...uh...are forms of behavior.

Uh...behavior is what is criminalized.

What do you think should be criminalized???

39 posted on 01/20/2006 7:56:32 AM PST by Savage Beast (Why George W. Bush is a Great President in five words or less: 9/11 was never repeated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
LOL, Even though I am 67, The odds are I will outlive any 16 year old dog. And no one could get mad at me for calling my "wife" a b!tch.

You might have to marry an underage dog to make that estate transfer thing work. But marrying underage dogs! Is culture ready for that. Maybe if it isn't a samesex underage dog it'll work. Next year.

40 posted on 01/20/2006 7:56:36 AM PST by countorlock (Tell me how you would hurt me when I don't no how I could hurt myself?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: atomicpossum

Very true. One could argue that quantity should have been easier to change than gender.


41 posted on 01/20/2006 7:57:52 AM PST by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
>Its all in the playbook of subversion

I don't know . . . This book
was all about freedom, but
polygamy too!

42 posted on 01/20/2006 7:58:11 AM PST by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Diva
For the same reason we don't let children vote, drive or serve in the armed forces. Our country has established an arbitrary age of consent, of assumed adulthood and supposedly is to protect those younger than that arbitrary age (18). While I wouldn't have too much problem with all the members of NMBLA disappearing into the 'night and fog' all of a sudden, I think this is the one aspect of, as another poster wisely put it 'our post Judeo-Christian culture' that can be dealt with by pretty straight(pardon the pun) forward criteria. As to the incest part, I dunno; didn't do much good for European royalty but who knows:-(
43 posted on 01/20/2006 8:02:02 AM PST by RedStateRocker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
I don't see why you can't just let as many people as want to marry one another. And why just people? They could include their cats and dogs, horses, iguanas...whatever. Why not?

For example, it's illegal to import certain animals. Why can't a man just marry them and bring them in as his wives/husbands???

And why shouldn't a python, for example, or a chichilla have the right to vote--as somebody's spouse, they certainly should be allowed to become citizens, with all the rights other citizens have???

And just think. PETA could marry the Chicago stockyard and protect all their husbands and wives from becoming steaks.

The Left is certainly lacking in imagination.

44 posted on 01/20/2006 8:07:14 AM PST by Savage Beast (Why George W. Bush is a Great President in five words or less: 9/11 was never repeated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Polygamy is in the Bible and was part of the Mormon faith for awhile. Were either of those situations influenced by Pillow biting?


45 posted on 01/20/2006 8:08:19 AM PST by Blzbba (Sub sole nihil novi est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
>> I don't know . . . This book was all about freedom,
>> but polygamy

As I remember "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" They actually had something called a chain marriage, specifically designed to get around inheritance issues (you keep adding people, the union never dies...)
46 posted on 01/20/2006 8:11:38 AM PST by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss

hey! yeah!

and what about that Lazarus Long???


heck yeah.


47 posted on 01/20/2006 8:12:08 AM PST by Vaquero ("An armed society is a polite society" Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

What, no "Santorum Alert"? :^)


48 posted on 01/20/2006 8:14:42 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Polygamy has a cultural history where gay marriage does not. As such it makes more sense for polygamy (and polyandry) to be legal then gay marriage. Because there is some sort of logic involved and it is more supportive of reproductive sexuality then of course liberals will not support it.
49 posted on 01/20/2006 8:15:10 AM PST by Durus ("Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." JFK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Could Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy ?

Duh!!!

You can make the case Poligamists' have MORE right to marrage, because they can actually have children.

50 posted on 01/20/2006 8:18:02 AM PST by bigjoesaddle ("Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson