Polygamy upsets gay activists

Kansas City Star ^ | Mar. 19, 2006 | CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

[neverdem]

WASHINGTON — And now, polygamy.

With the sweetly titled HBO series “Big Love,” polygamy comes out of the closet. Under the headline “Polygamists, Unite!” Newsweek informs us of “polygamy activists emerging in the wake of the gay-marriage movement.” Says one evangelical Christian big lover: “Polygamy rights is the next civil-rights battle.”

Polygamy used to be stereotyped as the province of secretive Mormons, primitive Africans and profligate Arabs. With “Big Love” it moves to suburbia as a mere alternative lifestyle.

As Newsweek notes, these stirrings for the mainstreaming of polygamy (or, more accurately, polyamory) have their roots in the increasing legitimization of gay marriage. In an essay 10 years ago, I pointed out that it is utterly logical for polygamy rights to follow gay rights. After all, if traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two persons of (2) opposite gender, and if, as gay marriage advocates insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one’s autonomous choices in love, then the first requirement — the number restriction (two and only two) — is a similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible denial of individual choice.

This line of argument makes gay activists furious. I can understand why they do not want to be in the same room as polygamists. But I’m not the one who put them there. Their argument does.

Blogger and author Andrew Sullivan, who had the courage to advocate gay marriage at a time when it was considered pretty crazy, has called this the “polygamy diversion,” arguing that homosexuality and polygamy are categorically different because polygamy is a mere “activity” while homosexuality is an intrinsic state that “occupies a deeper level of human consciousness.”

But this distinction between higher and lower orders of love is precisely what gay rights activists so...

[Nonstatist]

Just confused because I thought most the gay marriage types were really trying to tear down marriage anyway

They are, but if polygamy activists get into the mix, a lot of liberals may get antsy about opening this pandora box. They dont want the cat out of the hat until gay marriage is a done deal.

[Durus]

Our founding father created a government of limited and enumerated powers. It is one of the basic concepts concerning our system of government. I'm concerned that anyone would be willing to ignore this basic concept to further a social engineering goal. That includes the USSC by the way.

"No man can become a law unto himself under the guise of ‘freedom of religion'".

Nor can the government assume unlimited powers with or without collaboration of the USSC. I think Roe v. Wade is a prime example of the results of the USSC simply assuming powers.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Blogger and author Andrew Sullivan, who had the courage to advocate gay marriage at a time when it was considered pretty crazy, has called this the “polygamy diversion,” arguing that homosexuality and polygamy are categorically different because polygamy is a mere “activity” while homosexuality is an intrinsic state that “occupies a deeper level of human consciousness.”

Unbelievable.

[scripter]

Unbelievable.

Isn't it? From what I've read of Andrew Sullivan for the past few years it's quite typical. Homosexual activists Andrew Sullivan and Mark Pietrzyk have been known to say anything for the good of the cause.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Our founding father created a government of limited and enumerated powers.

Which “founding father” is that???

Where is it enumerated that marriage is a “right” in the Constitution?

So, we should allow ritual murder as a “right” of religious freedom???

No man can become a law unto himself under the guise of ‘freedom of religion.'

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-

In fact, from where are the enumerated rights in the United States’ Constitution derived???

ANSWER - - The Declaration of Independence: "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…"

Genesis...

[RHINO369]

"That polygamy is certainly no worse morally than homosexual marriage."

Its definitely worse for society though.If two men wanna go fag off that leaves two women out there for the rest of us men. If one guy has 6 wives there are 5 guys who cannot possibly get a woman. When a society has alot of guys who have no possibility of ever getting a woman, they become violent. If polygamy ever became widespread in America the crime rate would sky rocket, and eventually a mob of 18-25 year old men would overthrow the government and redistribute the women.

There's a reason why polygamist towns push young men out of their society.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

It's hard to know whether to go Monty Python (wink, wink, nudge, nudge...) or Beavis and Butthead (deeper...hehehehe).

And he gets paid to write stuff like this too.

[Cheburashka]

You of course have to check your state constitution to find out if the powers to regulate driving, practice of medicine, and marriage are given to the state by the people. None are regulated at the federal level.

The fact that at one time something was not regulated does not mean it cannot or should not be regulated by the government.
Driving became possible before people realized how potentially dangerous an act it was. So the laws had to catch up later.
Drivers' licenses mean that the government has attempted to ascertain that you are competent to be driving a ton or so of metal down the road at 20-65 miles per hour. You of course might be perfectly capable of driving safely. How about that nimrod coming towards you at 45 mph just on the other side of the double line? Do you want someone to at least have checked out whether that clod has any clue what he is doing?
At the start of the Republic basically all doctors were quacks. His doctor bled George Washington just before he died. On some quack theory or another.
As late as the Civil War doctors had no idea of the proper sanitary practices for amputations in order to minimize post surgery infections.
If you point out that licenses do not prevent all the potential catastrophes, that is true. But everyone believes that they do help reduce the number of incompetent people doing potentially danger things.
If you have a better idea, run for office, put your better idea in place.

[ElkGroveDan]

Bestiality is already legal in WA.

The reference was to marital bestiality...people will want to marry their dogs, horses, etc.

[Cheburashka]

They are, but if polygamy activists get into the mix, a lot of liberals may get antsy about opening this pandora box. They dont want the cat out of the hat until gay marriage is a done deal.
---
Nonstatist, hitting the nail on the head.

[Nonstatist]

If polygamy ever became widespread in America the crime rate would sky rocket

And what if feminists in control of legislatures enact laws that discourage marriage, such as no-fault divorce and pro-fem custody law ? Marriage rates are dropping and theres a de-coupling of child-raising and marriage, but I guess as long as men can still "hook-up", the society won't devolve? Maybe , maybe not.

[DelphiUser]

Your voice sounds familiar, what high school did you go to?

Wait, I dated your sister, she was as fox!

(Smack) hey would you rather I said she was ugly? (Smack-Smack)

(How old friends become old enemies)

Whew, I don’t want that, so…..

Long time no see, I hope you are doing well…(Tries to place face silently…)

[Young Scholar]

If one guy has 6 wives there are 5 guys who cannot possibly get a woman.

Now there's an interesting line of reasoning... I doubt you'll ses a New York Times editorial arguing that one.

[Flavius Josephus]

I think what happens is that when the first wife gets past childbearing years, the man, who is by now at the peak of his earning potential, goes out and gets a new childbearer. Isn't this better than kicking the old wife to the curb and marrying someone half his age, as happens now?

[Flavius Josephus]

I don't know that buggering animals counts, because they ain't talkin'.

[DelphiUser]

>>Just think of the numbers of pairs of shoes!

If you married wives with the same size feet… Nah they’d want to match, just to mess that up.

LOL!

[Sensei Ern]

When all is a free-for-all, what will happen after they do the expose' on the gay guy married to a man, and becomes a polygamist by marrying a woman, then marries a dog, then marries a 5 year-old?

[trubluolyguy]

And I bet if someone dies while a thief in doing his thing, even if not his intent, he might feel bad too.

[DelphiUser]

>>Of course first you have to more than one woman to agree to marry you

I had a hard enough time finding Mrs. Delphiuser. (Had to find a woman with good taste in everything but men)

[Centurion2000]

No, the real problem with polygamy would be this. In this country a blue collar worker used to be able to completely provide for his family on one full time paycheck and live reasonably well.

Now it takes TWO full time paychecks to live reasonably well due to taxation.

How would people like it if it wound up taking 3 or 4 full time paychecks to live reasonably well? You can bet the government would crank up the tax rates if this went legal.