Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 43 of 43
  1. #41  
    Senior Member Constitutionally Speaking's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,301
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Arguments for/against polygamy, and incest stand on their own. Gay marriage doesnt weaken or strengthen those positions.

    They are IDENTICAL arguments. Why can't consenting adults who love each have the same rights as more traditional relationships??
    I long for the days when our President actually liked our country.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #42  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Constitutionally Speaking View Post
    They are IDENTICAL arguments. Why can't consenting adults who love each have the same rights as more traditional relationships??
    Well, ok... make your best argument against polygamy, and we'll see if it applies to gay marriage.

    Sorry, gay marriage is functionally no different than heterosexual marriage except the genders of the participants. No new laws need t o be ironed out, no new policy needs to be created. Not quite the case with polygamy.... the legal cluster fuck of trying to determine inheritance, divorce, etc is reason enough to consider it a bad idea.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #43  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Assuming the percentages of gay men and women are statistically similar, this really wouldn't be an issue would it?
    So lets go ahead and assume the number of polygamist women (1 woman, several husbands) and men (1 man, several wives) is statistically similar. Problem solved.

    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Gee, that sounds like an argument FOR gay marriage.

    But there is plenty of historical precedent to suggest that those sorts of things happen in polygamist societies.
    I agree that if polygamy is legalized then there's really no argument against gay marriage. Or incest, beastiality, age of consent laws, or any other restrictions we place on marriage.

    There's plenty of historical precedent that homosexuals shouldn't marry, why isn't that enough for gay marriage?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •