Same-Sex Marriage arguments being used to support polygamy… It was inevitable!

The Home of Uncommon Sense ^ | 03/20/2005 | Craig DeLuz

[Craig DeLuz]

Just as many conservatives predicted, the arguments being used by liberal politicians and judges to legalize same sex unions are now being used to support polygamy.

Read More...

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense... www.craigdeluz.com

[trubluolyguy]

I can remember a couple years ago being told that the "slippery slope" argument was ridiculous.


Apparantly not that ridiculous after all.

[Craig DeLuz]

History has proven that when it comes to political interest groups, the "slippery slope" argument is totally valid. Once they achieve one goal, they do not disband. They simply look for the next battle.

But in this case, it is clear that the slippery slope is not only applicable, but is a major part of a political and legal strategy to undermine traditional values.

[Grut]

So, what's wrong with polygamy? Or polyandry, for that matter?

[trubluolyguy]

So, what's wrong with polygamy? Or polyandry, for that matter?

---

It generally leads to forced marriages of teen or barely teen girls to much older men, thus institutionalized child molestation.

[supercat]

So, what's wrong with polygamy? Or polyandry, for that matter?

One major function of marriage is to ensure the reliable identification of children's parents. Polygyny does not interfere with this goal: even if a man marries twelve wives, any child born into that family will know the identity of the father (the husband of all the wives) and the mother (the woman who gave birth). By contrast, polyandry would render uncertain the identity of children's fathers.

It should be noted, btw, that the assymmetric treatment of adultery almost certainly flows from an extension of this principle: people have the right to know the identity of their offspring, unless by their own actions they forfeit such right.

There is little need for laws to protect women's rights in this regard. If a woman is carrying a child, it's a pretty safe bet that it's hers. Even if a woman's husband is sleeping with dozens of other unmarried woman, the woman would have no trouble knowing which of the husband's children were her own. By contrast, if a man's wife sleeps with even one other man, the husband can no longer be certain that any child she bears 7-10 months later is his.

In a society with a balanced male/female ratio, polygyny would cause problems if not counterbalanced by polyandry; although DNA testing might make polyandry less impossible than it otherwise would be, I really don't see it gaining acceptance among any people who want children.

[Grut]

In fact, DNA testing destroys your whole argument.

[supercat]

In fact, DNA testing destroys your whole argument.

It does weaken it, but I don't think most men would be very keen about having to wait for an amnio before they could tell whether their wife's child was 'theirs'.