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 ...
I guess Mormons never heard of synchronization.
Because it weakens their case that gay marriage is about love and that its about monogamy. The fact is that its really just a trojan horse for deligitimizing marriage as the institution from which children are raised.
You are so mean. I love it, and it reminds me of Hildabeast.
Slippery slope, moral absolutes, homosexual agenda.
Heather Has Two Mommies and a Daddy.
Daddy's Roommate and His Wife.
Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter Have Their Way With KarlInOhio.
Some mornings I can't stand myself ;)
Unlike what happened when the homosexuals rode the "civil rights, anti-discrimination" coat-tails of African-Americans. The issues had nothing to do with each other, but it worked.
You skipped incest...you know, the guy that wants to marry his sister. That comes next.
This article and thread on polygamy is funny. The numbers on the link are encouraging.
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Pretty gerbil you look so cute going up the chute.
Oh why..., oh why can't we all just get along?
Not if you marry sisters.
Krauthammer nails it.
Because it demonstrates that Gay Marriage leads us down a slippery slope.
Those poll numbers are great news! Thanks for pinging me.
Ah thanks. Just confused because I thought most the gay marriage types were really trying to tear down marriage anyway. I guess there are a few who are true believers...
Yeah, that sounds pretty bad, too.
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.