[Coleus]

first it is the homosexuals, then it will be the polygamists, then your brother & sister, mother & father, then your dog, sheep and goat, and perhaps your blow-up doll.  It will not end.

[ncountylee]

It's the ISMs, always the ISMs.

[Triggerhippie]

If what they are each looking for is shared fiscal and insurance benefits they could always form a corporation, base it in their place of residence and live happily forever. And no-one will ever care (or know).

They want this "recognition" to destroy traditional views on marriage, and by extension, Judeo-Christianity.

[MBB1984]

No it will not. It is a continued descent into depravity. If the right of privacy protects sodomy how can it not include polygamy with consenting adults? Though I find polygamy abhorrent, I find homosexuality more abhorrent.

[Conservatrix]

What I fear is the NAMBLA crowd pushing for marriage of men to teenage boys. Talk about the lid being off the can... pretty soon, parents will have no rights and any slick &*^*& (insert word here) that manages to seduce or scare a young boy could go ahead and marry them. I suppose heterosexual pedophiles could end up doing the same thing...
and you are not kidding about "animal love." That is down the road. People will marry their pets. I mean, senile old women leave their fortunes to their kitties already, why not?
God, HELP US!

[GSlob]

Let them. Just imagine the messiness of a polygamous divorce settlement. That alone would finish them, and would be fun to watch.

[FreeRep]

Belgium and the Netherlands are two nations that have legalized civil union legislation for polygamous relationships. It is a "slippery slope."

[Candor7]

Polygamy? Hell the Muslims will love that!

What about Polygny ( Women with multiple husbands?)

Once the bottle is opened there's no putting the stopper back on it.

[A.A. Cunningham]

"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in such a matter."
Martin Luther Luther's Letters, De Wette -- Seidemann, Berlin, 1828, vol. 2, p. 459.

So much for sola scriptura

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

"first it is the homosexuals, then it will be the polygamists, then your brother & sister, mother & father, then your dog, sheep and goat, and perhaps your blow-up doll. It will not end."

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

You are probably correct. There are severe sanctions in the Old Testament against bestiality (sex with animals). Those Christians who argue that the Old Testament law is no longer relevant must contend with the fact that bestiality is nowhere explicitly prohibited in the New Testament. There are those who argue that though all believers, whether in Old Testament or New, are "saved by faith alone", all believers are also constrained by the non-ceremonial elements of the OT law. Of course, making the distinction between the ceremonial and moral laws can be very tricky, but they do have a point: if a moral or ethical standard has to be repeated in the New Testament in order to remain in force (as the sanctions against homosexual sexual activity are) and bestiality is not explicitly referenced, on what basis do such "NT only" believers oppose bestiality?

[Tzimisce]

ROCK ON! I can take a date to my wedding!

[Kokojmudd]

first it is the homosexuals, then it will be the polygamists, then your brother & sister, mother & father, then your dog, sheep and goat, and perhaps your blow-up doll. It will not end.

Nah. It'll end. All cultures which normalize such behavior come to an end in one way or another.

[Mamzelle]

Consider the circus that will result in Divorce Court.

Can hubby bring home a new wife, if the first objects?

If the first wife objects, and decides to file for divorce, will the property be divided two ways, or three ways?

[WileyC]

South Dakota lawmakers this year proposed the first constitutional marriage amendment that specifically outlaws unions of "two or more" persons.

Ummm, wouldn't this mean that ALL marriage (including between 1 man and 1 woman) would then be illegal? =)

[Lorianne]

I want to marry my bunny slippers. Is that weird?

[ichabod1]

then your dog, sheep and goat, and perhaps your blow-up doll.

I think taking the hyperbole to this extreme in describing the camel's nose has made the argument more difficult, because then people laugh. But if you say, if two men may marry, why may a man not have more than one wife or vice versa? After all it's in the bible, and it's a Holy Thing to the Muslims. Then they stop smiling.