Posted on 07/09/2015 5:48:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Why civil marriage should not encompass group unions.
Now that same-sex marriage is legal in all 50 states, writer Freddie de Boer wants its proponents to adopt a new focus. “Where does the next advance come?” he asks in an essay at Politico. “Now that we’ve defined that love and devotion and family isn’t driven by gender alone, why should it be limited to just two individuals? The most natural advance next for marriage lies in legalized polygamy.”
The time is ripe, he argues, in part because there’s no longer a strategic reason to hold off. “To advocate for polygamy during the marriage equality fight may have seemed to confirm the socially conservative narrative, that gay marriage augured a wholesale collapse in traditional values,” he observes. “But times have changed; while work remains to be done, the immediate danger to marriage equality has passed.”
He proceeds to argue that “the case against polygamy is incredibly flimsy, almost entirely lacking in rational basis and animated by purely irrational fears and prejudice.” And he goes further, insisting that even if there are pragmatic reasons to deny state-sanction to polygamous marriage, we must extend it anyway because it is a human right. “We must insist that rights cannot be dismissed out of short-term interests of logistics and political pragmatism,” he says in the essay, adding in a followup blog post that “logistics are never sufficient reason to deny human rights.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
These guys are against Polygamy?
Bigots!
Exactly right. Now all of a sudden it is OK for them to discriminant against a bi-sexual who just wants to love a man and a woman. I thought it was all about love, hum?
Bi-sexuals can’t have their dignity unless they can marry at least one person of each sex.
And what about tri-sexuals and quadrasexuals - people who have a sexual attraction to people of both sexes and transexuals of both sexes.
It’s all about dignity and happiness.
That’s what the Supreme Court says.
So a bi-sexual who loves a man & a woman can’t marry them? That’s hate!
//s
When a ma-an loves a ... um...
hmmm.....
“And what about tri-sexuals and quadrasexuals - people who have a sexual attraction to people of both sexes and transexuals of both sexes.
It’s all about dignity and happiness.”
and your dog or your cat or your dog and you cat and the mice. don’t forget the mice.
” One of the problems with polygyny is that it non egalitarian. The rich guy can have many of the most beautiful wives leaving poorer males few options beyond homosexuality or prostitutes.”
from the female perspective, a woman with less than ordinary looks but with other skills in bearing offspring, or managing the household budget, or good with children, or a good cook or housekeeper, etc. who might not have had the opportunity to marry because she wasn’t pretty enough, might find her marriage niche exactly suitable for a polygamous marriage.
I think you should have at least one mate from each of the 50 some sexual persuasions.
I can list 10 third-world countries just off the top of my head where those “poorer males” would appear to be millionaire tycoons to the native single women.
So they want their kind of marriage and yet deny others to their kind of marriage. Now correct me if I ma wrong but the last few years those who opposed their contracts were called bigots, so what does that make them?
What they’re wanting is monetary and other privileges granted by the government. Do we want to subsidize this and whatever comes after it? Do non-polygamists want to pay polygamists with money and privilege?
A little late for that argument, isn’t it?
are you Nutts? You knew it was the plan ... NUTS
Reparations ... don’t play with the wall of hate that is Them! It is never Love, They gave you or US
A few thoughts:
1. Many men are forgoing marriage (& children, so why not let those men that want to marry take as many wives (& children) as they want?
2. What happens if a wealthy man marries many wives and one (or more) of those wives wants a divorce? How is the property split? My guess is, the departing wife would get a much smaller share of the property.
3. What happens when a man takes more wives than he can afford to? Does the Government step in and provide assistance? [One could argue, this is de-facto happening today. Not unheard of for one guy to have a few “baby mommas”]
4. Allowing for multiple wives may reduce the phenomenon of serial monogamy.
Will probably get flamed for this, but don’t think polygamy would be that big a deal. I also think that some marriages would be stronger and last longer, since there would be less financial incentive for divorce.
Come think of it
Men why you want three mother in laws LOL!
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.