Is Polygamy The Next Gay Marriage?

[LoneLaugher]

If it's undeniable, why is the OP phrased as a question?

 

[konradv]

The homo lobby swore over and over again that this issue would never come up. Now it's undeniable that we're headed down the slippery slope.

So what if it is? You just can't help minding other people's business, can you, you despicable little peeper?

Now THAT's funny.

Private business, you still trying to equate that with public business? Give it up, they're not the same thing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP doesn't seem to get that the article he posted does NOT make the case that same sex marriage is the slippery slope to legally recognized polygamy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There's so much the OP doesn't get it's difficult to keep track.

 

[AntiParty]

The homo lobby swore over and over again that this issue would never come up. Now it's undeniable that we're headed down the slippery slope.

Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage - The Daily Beast

Back in the early days of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender movement’s push for marriage equality, this slippery slope to polygamy was pragmatically taboo. After all, arguments about gay marriage leading to polygamy were lobbed almost entirely with the purpose of derailing the gay rights agenda. And there was also something inherently offensive about making the connection, along the same lines of suggesting that gay marriage would lead to people marrying goats. Never mind the fact that opposite-sex goat-human marriage had been looming as a dangerous temptation all along…

Still, people often mention polygamy and gay marriage in the same sentence (not to mention the same essay). Recently—in, surprise, Utah—a judge struck down a part of that state’s anti-polygamy law. Mind you, the Utah law makes it a felony punishable by up to five years in prison when someone “cohabits with another person” to whom they aren’t legally married. This makes me wonder whether Utah also outlaws the combustion engine, the Internet and other realities of modern life, but anyway there you have it.

The legal challenge came after the state sued the stars of Sister Wives, a TV show that follows the real life of one husband, his four wives, and their 17 children. Now here’s the thing: Sister Wives premiered in September 2010, but Kody and Meri married in 1990, Kody and Janelle married in 1993, and Kody and Christine married in 1994. In other words, all those marriages predate even the earliest adoption of gay marriage in America, which was in Massachusetts in 2004. And second, in the Sister Wives family, Kody married each of the women, but the women didn’t marry each other.

In other words, polygamy, as it generally is practiced in the United States, is a predominantly heterosexual enterprise—like heterosexuality (or the male ideal of heterosexuality) on steroids. After all, while the percentage of married women who have affairs has risen in recent decades, married men still do most of the cheating. Conservatives concerned about the high rate of divorce in America should stop blaming gay marriage but instead heterosexual infidelity—a prime culprit in 55 percent of divorces.

If couples want to bring cheating out of the deceitful shadows and instead incorporate it openly into their relationship—plus have more hands on deck for kids and more earners in the household in a tough economy—who are we to judge?

Seriously, I’m a bit too traditional and jealous for that sort of thing, but I’m also too traditional to wear jeggings outside the house. Still, you (mostly) don’t see me judging anyone else for doing so.

In 2013 when the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples, pro-polygamy groups heralded the ruling as a step away from the conventional one-man one-woman definition of marriage and, thus, as opening the door to polygamy. I get that, and to an extent pro-polygamy activists may be trying to latch their still-widely unpopular cause onto the increasingly victorious rainbow bandwagon. ​

Clearly you like Big Government and want to control religions that you aren't familiar with.

When the gay marriage debate started I didn't care if it was a choice or not. I believe we live in America, the land of the free. Freedom of religion doesn't mean to enforce Christian beliefs onto everyone through the use of LAW........................It means accepting other religions into our society (we made this part of the Constitution because we were treated at one point in time like we treat others now)

So tell me why you WANT TO CONTROL Polygamy. . .

 

[bripat9643]

The homo lobby swore over and over again that this issue would never come up. Now it's undeniable that we're headed down the slippery slope.

Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage - The Daily Beast

Back in the early days of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender movement’s push for marriage equality, this slippery slope to polygamy was pragmatically taboo. After all, arguments about gay marriage leading to polygamy were lobbed almost entirely with the purpose of derailing the gay rights agenda. And there was also something inherently offensive about making the connection, along the same lines of suggesting that gay marriage would lead to people marrying goats. Never mind the fact that opposite-sex goat-human marriage had been looming as a dangerous temptation all along…

Still, people often mention polygamy and gay marriage in the same sentence (not to mention the same essay). Recently—in, surprise, Utah—a judge struck down a part of that state’s anti-polygamy law. Mind you, the Utah law makes it a felony punishable by up to five years in prison when someone “cohabits with another person” to whom they aren’t legally married. This makes me wonder whether Utah also outlaws the combustion engine, the Internet and other realities of modern life, but anyway there you have it.

The legal challenge came after the state sued the stars of Sister Wives, a TV show that follows the real life of one husband, his four wives, and their 17 children. Now here’s the thing: Sister Wives premiered in September 2010, but Kody and Meri married in 1990, Kody and Janelle married in 1993, and Kody and Christine married in 1994. In other words, all those marriages predate even the earliest adoption of gay marriage in America, which was in Massachusetts in 2004. And second, in the Sister Wives family, Kody married each of the women, but the women didn’t marry each other.

In other words, polygamy, as it generally is practiced in the United States, is a predominantly heterosexual enterprise—like heterosexuality (or the male ideal of heterosexuality) on steroids. After all, while the percentage of married women who have affairs has risen in recent decades, married men still do most of the cheating. Conservatives concerned about the high rate of divorce in America should stop blaming gay marriage but instead heterosexual infidelity—a prime culprit in 55 percent of divorces.

If couples want to bring cheating out of the deceitful shadows and instead incorporate it openly into their relationship—plus have more hands on deck for kids and more earners in the household in a tough economy—who are we to judge?

Seriously, I’m a bit too traditional and jealous for that sort of thing, but I’m also too traditional to wear jeggings outside the house. Still, you (mostly) don’t see me judging anyone else for doing so.

In 2013 when the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples, pro-polygamy groups heralded the ruling as a step away from the conventional one-man one-woman definition of marriage and, thus, as opening the door to polygamy. I get that, and to an extent pro-polygamy activists may be trying to latch their still-widely unpopular cause onto the increasingly victorious rainbow bandwagon. ​

Clearly you like Big Government and want to control religions that you aren't familiar with.

When the gay marriage debate started I didn't care if it was a choice or not. I believe we live in America, the land of the free. Freedom of religion doesn't mean to enforce Christian beliefs onto everyone through the use of LAW........................It means accepting other religions into our society (we made this part of the Constitution because we were treated at one point in time like we treat others now)

So tell me why you WANT TO CONTROL Polygamy. . .

We already do control it, nimrod.

 

[Rikurzhen]

It will never become a trend, and there will be abuses, as with any unorthodox lifestyle but I knew this was coming as soon as gay marriage became acceptable and legal in many states and growing.

It's hard to say how trendy it will become but using the attitudes of today for guidance is simply bad analysis. Mali has widespread polygamy where 40% of all married women are in polygamous marriages.

Why do women consent? That's the key. The choice usually breaks down like this - marry a poor man and have him all to yourself or marry a rich man and share him with other wives. 40% of women seem content with marrying a wealthier man and sharing him rather than marrying a goat herder and having that man all to themselves.

That same dynamic is likely to develop here. Look at how much time and energy women spend watching and reading about rich people, celebrities, gossip and voyeur shows are the bread and butter of media companies today. Women seem to want to escape from the mundane drudgery of existence.

How women has Charlie Sheen had? How many wives? Women keep showing up in that dude's life and not always sequentially.

For those who don't care, you should, because this is society destabliizing. Having hordes of angry young men who can't afford to entice a woman means that they express their anger at society or they just give up on life. Neither is a good outcome and the blowback of social upheaval always hits the rest of us.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Maybe you could get the govt to install cameras in your bathroom and bedroom, you know, seeing as you like the govt in those places.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There's so much the OP doesn't get it's difficult to keep track.

It's irrelevant anyway. Either same sex monogamous marriage is sufficiently similar to man/woman monogamous marriage to deserve equal treatment under the law or it isn't.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

One is enough. I couldn't imagine dealing with 2,3,4,5. I'd just jump off a bridge.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The bigotry in this thread is mind-blowing.

Every single one of you uneducated bigots bashing polygamy will completely reverse course after just one weekend on Lesbian Polygamist Island. It's guaranteed to liberate every strong, independent womyn from the shackles of heterosexuality, and turn every manpig into an estrogen-chugging womyn-to-be.

Are you stoned again?!

 

[mdk]

It should be legal. If all parties consent to the marriage then why should any of us care?

 

[rightwinger]

People who wanted interracial marriage fought for interracial marriage
People who wanted gay marriage fought for gay marriage
People who want polygamy will fight for polygamy

All are fighting for their own interests and beliefs. One does not necessarily lead to the other

 

[Redfish]

The homo lobby swore over and over again that this issue would never come up.

Link? The entire lobby, please.

Marriage quality is about two people.

The issue is where to allow continuing marriages of two people that have a living arrangement.

As an anarcho commie, you have no entry in this.

Who says the definition of marriage is limited to two people? Society used to say marriage is a union between two people of the opposite sex, but the homos all cried about that. They claimed it was about "consenting adults." If three people all consent to be married to each other, what reason can the apologists for "gay marriage" give for denying them?

thats the point, and it then becomes a legal issue. If gay marriage is legalized then there is absolutely no legal defense that can be brought against all forms of multiple person marriage.

But I think some of us are beginning to get it. Its part of the left wing desire to destroy our society by destroying the family unit. Then everyone can only have one loyalty------------the state.

 

[Redfish]

People who wanted interracial marriage fought for interracial marriage
People who wanted gay marriage fought for gay marriage
People who want polygamy will fight for polygamy

All are fighting for their own interests and beliefs. One does not necessarily lead to the other

the only people who would benefit would be the divorce lawyers. Can you imagine a divorce in a marriage of 5 men and 8 women? How many lawyers and how much court time??

 

[ricechickie]

It's hard to say how trendy it will become but using the attitudes of today for guidance is simply bad analysis. Mali has widespread polygamy where 40% of all married women are in polygamous marriages.

Why do women consent? That's the key. The choice usually breaks down like this - marry a poor man and have him all to yourself or marry a rich man and share him with other wives. 40% of women seem content with marrying a wealthier man and sharing him rather than marrying a goat herder and having that man all to themselves.

That same dynamic is likely to develop here. Look at how much time and energy women spend watching and reading about rich people, celebrities, gossip and voyeur shows are the bread and butter of media companies today. Women seem to want to escape from the mundane drudgery of existence.

How women has Charlie Sheen had? How many wives? Women keep showing up in that dude's life and not always sequentially.

For those who don't care, you should, because this is society destabliizing. Having hordes of angry young men who can't afford to entice a woman means that they express their anger at society or they just give up on life. Neither is a good outcome and the blowback of social upheaval always hits the rest of us.

Any change has the potential to destabilize society. The key is to keep changes relatively small, so that they can become the norm more quickly. Baby steps.

 

[Redfish]

It's hard to say how trendy it will become but using the attitudes of today for guidance is simply bad analysis. Mali has widespread polygamy where 40% of all married women are in polygamous marriages.

Why do women consent? That's the key. The choice usually breaks down like this - marry a poor man and have him all to yourself or marry a rich man and share him with other wives. 40% of women seem content with marrying a wealthier man and sharing him rather than marrying a goat herder and having that man all to themselves.

That same dynamic is likely to develop here. Look at how much time and energy women spend watching and reading about rich people, celebrities, gossip and voyeur shows are the bread and butter of media companies today. Women seem to want to escape from the mundane drudgery of existence.

How women has Charlie Sheen had? How many wives? Women keep showing up in that dude's life and not always sequentially.

For those who don't care, you should, because this is society destabliizing. Having hordes of angry young men who can't afford to entice a woman means that they express their anger at society or they just give up on life. Neither is a good outcome and the blowback of social upheaval always hits the rest of us.

Any change has the potential to destabilize society. The key is to keep changes relatively small, so that they can become the norm more quickly. Baby steps.

good point, but that goes against obama and libs in their effort to "fundamentally transform" this nation.

 

[ricechickie]

the only people who would benefit would be the divorce lawyers. Can you imagine a divorce in a marriage of 5 men and 8 women? How many lawyers and how much court time??

Prenups. Mandatory.

Marriage should be a contract, not a "social contract," but an explicit contract between the marriage partners, that will provide for many different scenarios, including the dissolution of the marriage.

 

[ricechickie]

good point, but that goes against obama and libs in their effort to "fundamentally transform" this nation.

Bullshit.

Obama has proven himself to be a completely moderate tool.

If he was a raging socialist, I'd support him more.

 

[Redfish]

the only people who would benefit would be the divorce lawyers. Can you imagine a divorce in a marriage of 5 men and 8 women? How many lawyers and how much court time??

Prenups. Mandatory.

Marriage should be a contract, not a "social contract," but an explicit contract between the marriage partners, that will provide for many different scenarios, including the dissolution of the marriage.

Sure, but it still requires lawyers and courts to administer the terms of a prenup. How many pages do you imagine a prenup would be for a marriage of 5 men, 8 women, 10 kids, 7 cars, 2 trucks, a camper, two boats, and 4 dogs?