Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And why do they think same sex marriage will somehow lead to those things, straight marriage hasn't lead to them yet, shouldn't straight marriage be considered a part of that slippery slope?
What we need to be looking at are principles, not details.
The principle of restricting marriage to only one man and one woman. Was basically a reflection of social norms. Especially in regards to children, inheritance, and morality.
When we look at same-sex marriage and polygamy. The reason why those things have been illegal, mostly has to do with objective morality. Basically, homosexuality has been considered a sin by practically all Christian sects for 2,000 years. Polygamy has also been illegal by practically all Christian sects for the same period of time. Both same-sex marriage and polygamy have for the most part been illegal everywhere in the United States since we were a British colony.
People are legalizing same-sex marriage on the principle that the government basically doesn't have the right to decide who someone is allowed to have sex with(and thus marry). In reality what it means is that the government does not have the right to impose morality whatsoever.
In fact, one of the arguments for why same-sex marriage. Is that gay people are already together as a couple, and thats perfectly legal. What is wrong with giving people who love each other the right to see each other in the hospital? Or the right to the thousands of other benefits which married couples are entitled to?
Look at it like this. One of the supposed fantasies of men, is a three-way with two women.
Now, lets pretend a guy has a three-way with two women. And they want to all become a couple. And then they decide they are happy with their arrangement, and live like that for years. Why should they be denied the rights of married couples? I suppose two of the three could get married, and the other would just join in? Is that fair?
The point is. Either the government can place restrictions on marriage, or it cannot. If the argument by homosexuals is that the government cannot discriminate against them simply because Christianity thinks homosexuality is a sin. Then the government cannot discriminate against polygamists for basically the same reasons.
Another question other than polygamy and homosexuality. Would be "close-relative marriages". In some states, first-cousins can get married. I've watched videos on TV, where people even closer than that were basically living as husband and wife, and wanted to get married. Such as uncles and nieces. And even, father and daughter.
For what purpose are those marriages illegal? Well, the typical argument is that incest can lead to birth defects. But, the rate of birth defects for women having children in their 40's is also very high. Should we make it illegal for women to have children after 40? Especially when it comes to women who can't even conceive naturally, but are rather taking fertility medications or getting artificially inseminated and having children sometimes into their 50's or 60's(if their eggs were frozen).
It is true that there are legal issues which aren't as easy to deal with in polygamy compared to gay-marriage. But I don't believe that the government should make something illegal, simply because it is more complex.
As for pedophilia. It sort of follows the same pattern. There is an "age of consent" and "marriageable age" which varies from state to state, across the United States. In South Carolina, a girl can marry as young as thirteen if she is pregnant. While in many states, the age of consent is 18 years old. That is a pretty huge gap.
The point is, if you begin to overturn thousands of years of common law. By using the equal-protection clause in a way it was never intended. Then you will ultimately destroy any ability for the government to place any restrictions on practically anything.
The argument which people are using to argue that same-sex marriage should be legal. Could easily be used to argue that polygamy should be legal. As well as other things which we have declared illegal, generally on the basis that it is for "the greater good".
What we need to be looking at are principles, not details.
For the sake of saving space, I won't be quoting your entire post but I did read it.
Regardless of the principality of what should and shouldn't be legal to marry, as long as the three requirements I've posted (and that I will post again here shortly) are met then it really doesn't matter what the make up of the couple(s) happen to be. As long as they meet these requirements, then they ought to be able to marry:
1. Are human, at least 18 years old
2. Of sound mind and judgment
3. Can sign a marriage contract of their own free will and volition with no coercion, blackmail, or any other related term.
There's room to improve and flesh out said requirements, but from a purely objective standpoint, the 3 listed above are a great start.
Let's look at this economicaly for a moment: Same sex marriage partners now qualify for spousal benefits under Social Security. If polygamy becomes recognized, then there will be no limit to the number of spouses eligible for benefits. This will collapse the SS spousal and survivor programs. How about military retirement and VA healthcare benefits to spouses? Are we prepared to see these benefits go away? Are we prepared to pay this price as a society for the "equality" of a few people? Are we?
Let's look at this economicaly for a moment: Same sex marriage partners now qualify for spousal benefits under Social Security. If polygamy becomes recognized, then there will be no limit to the number of spouses eligible for benefits. This will collapse the SS spousal and survivor programs. How about military retirement and VA healthcare benefits to spouses? Are we prepared to see these benefits go away? Are we prepared to pay this price as a society for the "equality" of a few people? Are we?
That brings a valid argument to the table, not so much for same sex couples, but certainly for multi-person couples.
Me, personally, I just don't get the whole polygamy thing. I try and think about it from every angle, but every time I do it just doesn't make sense. If you don't want to be in love with just one person, why marry? Why not share in love with as many people as you want? Again, I don't see how this could be that common, as I would think any romantic feelings that go beyond two people would have jealousy and perhaps a higher/lower level of feelings somewhere in the balance. If I'm wrong saying that about some, okay, but still a spouse is a singular term, not plural. (And btw, for those who would practice polygamy, since I imagine it mostly would be chased after by a man looking for multiple wives, isn't one bad enough already? )
Rehearsing the wedding vow , would be a waste of time if there is no exclusive commitment.
Two men marrying one woman would become more obviously homosexual as well.
Let's look at this economicaly for a moment: Same sex marriage partners now qualify for spousal benefits under Social Security. If polygamy becomes recognized, then there will be no limit to the number of spouses eligible for benefits. This will collapse the SS spousal and survivor programs.
That's a pretty big "if". I don't see it happening. Do you?
Each restriction on marriage will have to stand or fall based on it's own merits.
Race- Restrictions based on an inherent trait is unconstitutional, and unequal. So those fell
A white man could marry a white woman, but a white man could not marry a black woman.
That is discrimination based on race and unequal.
Age- we already have many laws based on age. Voting, smoking, drinking, owning guns, etc. Not to mention the contract law case precedence. You must be legally able to give informed consent to sign a marriage contract. Could the AOC change? yep. In the 1800s the average AOC in the US was 10, we now have an average AOC of 16. It seems we are heading in the right direction there.
A man can not marry a child, a woman can not marry a child - equal
species- well that goes with the whole consent thing, and non humans do not have rights based on our constitution. Sorry, your cat does not have the ability to consent to a legal contract.
A man can not marry a cat, a woman can not marry a cat - equal
Gender- here we go with that whole inherent trait thing again.
A man can marry a woman, but a man can not marry a man.
That is discrimination based on gender - unequal.
Number. I really don't care if you want to marry 15 people. But currently no one can, so that is equal under the law.
A man can not legally marry 10 women, a woman can not marry 10 men. Equal.
Blood relation- Again I don't really care, but the laws are equal.
A man can not marry a blood relation, and a woman can not marry a blood relation - equal.
That is looking at marriage from the 14th amendment view. Equal protection of the law.
You might want to read the actual ruling. The judge ruled that the COHABITATION section was unconstitutional, the marriage laws did not change. You can live with anyone you want to live with in any number, but you can legally marry only one other person.
You might want to read the actual ruling. The judge ruled that the COHABITATION section was unconstitutional, the marriage laws did not change. You can live with anyone you want to live with in any number, but you can legally marry only one other person.
We're discussing slippery slopes. It happens incrementaly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)