Posted on 03/22/2006 8:01:47 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON — And now, polygamy.
With the sweetly titled HBO series “Big Love,” polygamy comes out of the closet. Under the headline “Polygamists, Unite!” Newsweek informs us of “polygamy activists emerging in the wake of the gay-marriage movement.” Says one evangelical Christian big lover: “Polygamy rights is the next civil-rights battle.”
Polygamy used to be stereotyped as the province of secretive Mormons, primitive Africans and profligate Arabs. With “Big Love” it moves to suburbia as a mere alternative lifestyle.
As Newsweek notes, these stirrings for the mainstreaming of polygamy (or, more accurately, polyamory) have their roots in the increasing legitimization of gay marriage. In an essay 10 years ago, I pointed out that it is utterly logical for polygamy rights to follow gay rights. After all, if traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two persons of (2) opposite gender, and if, as gay marriage advocates insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one’s autonomous choices in love, then the first requirement — the number restriction (two and only two) — is a similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible denial of individual choice.
This line of argument makes gay activists furious. I can understand why they do not want to be in the same room as polygamists. But I’m not the one who put them there. Their argument does.
Blogger and author Andrew Sullivan, who had the courage to advocate gay marriage at a time when it was considered pretty crazy, has called this the “polygamy diversion,” arguing that homosexuality and polygamy are categorically different because polygamy is a mere “activity” while homosexuality is an intrinsic state that “occupies a deeper level of human consciousness.”
But this distinction between higher and lower orders of love is precisely what gay rights activists so...
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
What's worse: Being gay or having 8 wives? End of story.
It's less offensive than gay marriage.
With every wife comes another ste of inlaws. No thanks.
Nope, child marriage comes next. It's gay marriage -> polygamy -> child marriage (NAMBLA starts acting up again at this point) -> bestiality.
Gay or eight wives, gay or eight wives... being single isn't an option, is it? How about suicide?
Sodomites are fooling themselves if they think they can argue FOR the rights of the bisexual and against their right to marry someone of EACH sex. Why that would be asking him or her to deny half her/his existence... to choose a sexual preference.
My, isn't that special?
Hey, you're looking at the practical side. :-)
Must take an incredibly weak woman to accept such a living arrangement.
Then again, it's the same irony that explains why felons and drug dealers get more ladies than responsible guys...
No. It means that the left is opening up a new front. They haven't won the first one.
YIKES!!
Good point.
It can't produce children
It is all about Love
It is 2 people.
They sputter but can't answer.
Take a look at some of the women these felons and drug dealers do their thing with. That should explain a few things.
Gay marriage -> polygamy -> child marriage -> incest -> bestiality
I bet that buggary with animals does not offend the LGBT community.
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.