Posted on 05/15/2015 1:04:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
If we let gays get married, is polygamy next?
Well, no, obviously, but this is an argument that comes up over and over; and it just happened again. This time, it was from Ben Carson, who's running for (and has no chance of becoming) President. He hinted to CNBC that "other groups" would deserve marriage if gay couples gained the freedom to marry.
When pressed on what those other groups were, he eventually admitted that they might include bigamists.
This is a suggestion that comes up a lot, even from the Supreme Court. Last mont, Justice Alito observed, "a group consisting of two men and two women apply for a marriage license. Would there be any ground for denying them a license?"
Yes, there would, although the reason might not be immediately obvious.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Here's why: From a legal perspective, marriage is a contract, and gender doesn't change what the contract does. In states that have legalized marriage for gays and lesbians, the only change in those contracts was the genders. A few pronouns were switched, but when gay couples marry, everything else still works exactly the same way.
But for marriage contracts to cover multiple partners, a lot more would have to change. If there's a divorce, who gets custody of whose child? Who gets to make medical decisions for who? Are there limits on employer benefits for spouses? Can everyone immigrate together? If someone dies without a will, who's next of kin?
For marriage to start covering multiple partners, you can't just switch some pronouns. The whole contract would have to be re-written from the ground up.
So that's why marriage for gays doesn't lead to polygamy....
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
Everyone can save time by just noting this article comes from Huffington Post, and is therefore automatically concentrated idiocy.
Polygamy is not next, pederasty and pedophilia are
That is the most pathetic , weak argument I have veer heard or read about not opening the door to polygamy. Sadly some left wing sheep will read that and then repeat it and then think they sound really educated about the issue.
I’m sure we have all met one like that.
“everything else still works exactly the same way...”
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
And they've blown that one up too.
A BS article that fools nobody.
Too many USSC watch MSNBC and are out of touch with reality. Too many clerks coming from yale and Harvard.
Too many sheep who read this crap and then repeat what the article states and then thinking they sound educated.
Hmmm, well muslims like polygamy. Are leftists really going to deny muslims their right to have 4 wives?
I am sure it was “difficult” to repeal the Jim Crow laws, but difficulty to implement does not affect whether something is just.
The fact of the matter is. Polygamy was the norm through most of human history. Gay marriage has never happened.
How is it obvious? The author needs to explain.
marriage is a contract to benefit society. IOW production of children.
Two homosexuals have no physical way to “deliver”.
Society rewards the institution not the individual. Even a childless man and woman prove the model that benefits society. This whole article is premised on children not being a part of marriage.
for those on the left, marriage is NOT a contract it is an institution. Religion never needs enter the legal equation.
The question is - why is the “new” definition any “better” than the old definition,
and why would any “newer” definition not be “better” than the “new” definition?
Considering that polygamy is already accepted in the Muslim world, and has been for over a thousand years, and even has biblical precedent, I would think that HuffPo is being disingenuous.
Opposing polygamy is offensive to Muslims...
so we better allow it, right, libs?
If gay marriage is legalized heterosexual marriage will end. Marriage will simply be a contract of shared property between any 2 (or more) people living together. The institution will cease to exist in legal form.
Biblical polygamists: Abdon, Abijah, Abraham, Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, David,
Eliphaz, Elkanah, Esau, Ezra, Gideon,
Heman, Hosea, Ibzan, Issachar, Jacob,
Jair, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash,
Lamech, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Moses,
Nahor, Rehoboam, Saul, Shaharaim, Shimei,
Simeon, Solomon, Terah, Zedekiah, Ziba, and on and on.
-— The institution will cease to exist in legal form. -—
It really ended in 1970 with no-fault divorce. Since then, the divorce rate has doubled.
“No-fault divorce” originated in the USSR in 1918, with the intention of annihilating the family.
The divorce rate in the US in the late 1800s was about 1 per 100, IIRC.
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.