Are there secular reasons against gay marriage or polygamy?

[Teddy Pollins]

I am going to start another hot topic....
I'm sure most of us know religious reasons but are there any secular reasons against gay marriage? Other than "tradition", I haven't heard of any (counter: slavery was also tradition).
If there are secular reasons against gay marriage, what are they?
What about polygamy? I listened to Dan Savage talk about it a while back and he talked about something like fairness - hoarding of spouses or something similar.
This isn't a slippery slope discussion but often when I talk with religious people about gay marriage, it turns to polygamy and I don't have anything against polygamy. I can only reply back with "the Bible also has polygamy" which is not terribly satisfying. Is polygamy even bad?
Participation is welcome.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Between consenting adults?

No one's business.

IMO, we need to protect children and women from abuse from the likes of RW heroesTed Nugent, Warren Jeffs, Phil Robertson.

From the sermon that Robertson preached to a fundie group, it would seem the fundies are now pushing for young girls to be forced into "marriage" with an older man. We also know that Ted Nugent had himself named the guardian of a young girl for the purpose of legalized statutory rape. And of course, we also know fundie morms have been found guilty of child rape.

I really don't care what consenting adults do together. Its just not my business.

But we do need to protect the least among us. We need to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

 

[Katzndogz]

It will all be legal. Every perversion known to the most deranged mind will be legal. Necropholia will be legal.

Once a culture determines to become degenerate it doesn't stop until it doesn't exist.

 

[Unkotare]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

 

[aaronleland]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. Name a single secular argument against gay marriage. They don't exist, because the entire argument springs from something that doesn't even exist in the Bible, let alone in secular life.

 

[Unkotare]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

 

[aaronleland]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. You cut off a bulk of my post.

 

[Unkotare]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. .

Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

 

[aaronleland]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. .

Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Marriage was never needed for procreation. The institution didn't exist for millons of years of human history.Polygamy existed was an accepted practice into the 1900s. The idea of traditional marriage is a myth. It never existed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

. "Is polygamy even bad?"

No, polygamy isn't 'bad.'

It is a slippery slope fallacy, however.

Polygamy has nothing to do with the issue concerning the right of same-sex couples to access marriage law. No state's marriage law is written to accommodate three or more persons, which is not the case for same-sex couples. Because same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts, measures seeking to deny them access to those contracts are un-Constitutional.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The only secular arguments against gay marriage are easily refuted, and the arguer really doesn't care that much about it.

 

[Teddy Pollins]

Between consenting adults?

No one's business.

IMO, we need to protect children and women from abuse from the likes of RW heroesTed Nugent, Warren Jeffs, Phil Robertson.

From the sermon that Robertson preached to a fundie group, it would seem the fundies are now pushing for young girls to be forced into "marriage" with an older man. We also know that Ted Nugent had himself named the guardian of a young girl for the purpose of legalized statutory rape. And of course, we also know fundie morms have been found guilty of child rape.

I really don't care what consenting adults do together. Its just not my business.

But we do need to protect the least among us. We need to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Do you suppose polygams can't protect themselves? Funny they can protect more than 1 woman by the way.
with polygamy there are issues where older males with a lot of resources are going to have more wives leaving younger males with far fewer options. It works in very limited situations like when the male population is low due to warfare or something.
as far as gay marriage, I can't conceive of a legitimate reason to be for it.

 

[Unkotare]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. .

Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Marriage was never needed for procreation. The institution didn't exist for millons of years of human history.Polygamy existed was an accepted practice into the 1900s. The idea of traditional marriage is a myth. It never existed.

Now you're arguing about the reasons. Your original question was about whether they existed.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

Notice despite your claim "of course there are" you don't then offer any.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Of course there are. Doesn't mean everyone will agree.

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. .

Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Ah yes, the reproductive arguement. So when women hit menopause and can no longer make babies we should dissolve their marriages so their husbands can find some younger woman with whom to make babies?

 

[Mac1958]

I am going to start another hot topic....
I'm sure most of us know religious reasons but are there any secular reasons against gay marriage? Other than "tradition", I haven't heard of any (counter: slavery was also tradition).
If there are secular reasons against gay marriage, what are they?
What about polygamy? I listened to Dan Savage talk about it a while back and he talked about something like fairness - hoarding of spouses or something similar.
This isn't a slippery slope discussion but often when I talk with religious people about gay marriage, it turns to polygamy and I don't have anything against polygamy. I can only reply back with "the Bible also has polygamy" which is not terribly satisfying. Is polygamy even bad?
Participation is welcome.

Dang, that's an interesting question.

The issue I have as I think it through is the semi-equating of the two, gay marriage and polygamy.

I don't care if gays get married and it seems to me the secular case against it is weak. But polygamy? That definitely enters "slippery slope" territory for me.

.

 

[Unkotare]

No there aren't. ....

Of course there are. Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Then name a single secular argument against gay marriage. .

Gay marriage by definition contradicts one of the fundamental purposes of marriage - in every instance. It has also, perhaps until recently, violated society's accepted understanding of that institution. Polygamy results in the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and very often children, and in geographically limited communities may degrade genetic diversity.

Are these legitimate reasons for prohibiting both 'arrangements'? That's a separate question. The reasons do exist, whether you (or I) accept them as legitimate or not.

Marriage was never needed for procreation. The institution didn't exist for millons of years of human history.Polygamy existed was an accepted practice into the 1900s. The idea of traditional marriage is a myth. It never existed.

Now you're arguing about the reasons. Your original question was about whether they existed.

.

 

[longknife]

Marriage historically was a religious rite conducted by priests in order to enhance and increase their authority over the masses.

Natural selection was the primary force in Mankind until religious and political leaders tried to alter it for their own purposes.

Polygamy simply followed what humans saw in the world around them. Most females of all species select males they instinctively know to be the best for passing on genetic trails to help their offspring survive.

Only Humanity has ceased to accept that premise.

 

[bendog]

Polygamist leader Warren Jeffs sentenced to life in prison - CNN.com
There's demonstrable harm to children in the breakaway Mormon groups.

 

[g5000]

There is no secular argument against gay marriage.

Polygamous societies, in the aggregate, subordinate women and the math inevitably leads to underage girls being forced to marry old men.