A union is between a man and a woman only. If the USA legalizes marriage between two men and two women, what is next, polygamy? Marriage to animals? Marriage to children? What's next?
32 comments
This is another case of 'I can't differentiate between one taboo and another'.
Toga: All they know is that God forbids it - all things that God forbids are of equal 'badness' in their eyes, so they really don't understand that a consentual, loving relationship between adults is different from, say, raping goats for Satan.
Well, polygamy doesn't really sound like that bad an idea, but that's me. Anyways,, it's a bit like 'if you don't spank your child he'll end up getting the death penality.' sorta...
Wow, that was remarkably un-edgy compared to what I thought I'd say, funny old world ain't it?
Well, when animals and children are deemed capable of signing legally binding contracts, your slippery slope may make a bit more sense. Polygamy, while it may not make sense to me, others may be able to hack it. Seems like WAY more trouble than it's worth, but so long as it's fair for all involved, I fail to see the issue. The concept you fail to get though, is "consenting adults." Look it up, and when you do, things will make a lot more sense.
Perhaps you ought to stop worrying about your Big Scary Hypothesis Regarding the Consequences of Gay Marriage and actually verify whether it matches up with what's happened in the real world where gay marriage has been legalized.
Nah, too much like that evil science thing, I guess.
Actually, a number of states currently do allow child marriages (as young as 14). (This was what was being satirized at marryourdaughter.com, really...) So really, people who promote marriage as a consenting-adults configuration are pushing for a more consistently ethical system than is currently in place.
Senor Boogie Woogie often posts sarcastic remarks at IIDB. He is not a fundamentalist anything - just a smartass.
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
Yes, as a dog has legal standing, and can sign a marriage contract. And children are consenting adults, right? Right?...oh.
The main reason this doesn't hold is the idea of consent. However, on the NationStates General forum, poster Neo Art had a nice explanation of why polygamy and such are different from same-sex marriages.
This is roughly what ey said:
Imagine three people, Alice, Bob, and Carol (none of them are married). Alice can marry Bob, and Carol can marry Bob -- Alice and Carol are equal. However: Bob can marry Carol, Alice _can't_ marry Carol, so there is inequality.
Now, what if there's a fourth person, David. David is married to Carol.
Alice can't marry David, Bob can't marry David. So they are equal. Bigamy is not about inequality in the same way that same-sex marriage is.
---
Of course, this assumes that polygamy is even wrong, if everyone involved is fine with it then I see no problem
Let's see, Polygamy is already in some cultures, a man in India was married to a dog because he was caught having carnal knowlege of said dog, and Muhammed himself married a 6 yr old child, and consummated the marriage when the child was 9. In recent news an 8 yr old girl was repeatedly raped by her 31 yr old husband.
But You are interested in traditional marriage.
here ya go:
Here's a link to a traditional marriage
And here is another:
And here is another
Consenting adults, idiot!
But if the polygamy was for both men and women, and all had to be consenting, then why not?
Animals can't consent and children are not mature enough to have sex, plus you have to be eighteen to be able to enter into legal agreements (at least here in Sweden).
Senior Booger Wooger
Tee-hee!
"...what is next, polygamy? Marriage to animals? Marriage to children? What's next?"
Why should there be something following gay marriage? Why can't it stop there?
The slippery-slope argument is antiquated and easily rebuked.
Homosexuality =/= bestiality
Homosexuality =/= pedophilia
Informed consent is the key.
Homosexuality =/= polygamy
And arguably, polygamy isn't inherently immoral, as long as all partners are okay with it.
Note that polygamy bans are difficult, if not impossible, to enforce.
...by the way, your Bible doesn't seem to have much to say about polygamy.
A union is between a man and a woman only.
Why? Go on, tell me why this fact you pose as though it should be self-evident is.
If the USA legalizes marriage between two men and two women, what is next, polygamy?
Considering there are many polyamorous couple around couples around, setting up a legal safety net for them likely wouldn't be a terrible idea. So long as all adults are aware and on equal footing, I fail to see an issue on this one. Not to mention, there are a lot of people in your own Good Book that had scads of wives. I think Solomon had hundreds, if memory serves. David had quite a few, too, I believe.
Marriage to animals?
Animals cannot give consent or sign the appropriate contracts to agree to the union.
Marriage to children?
Neither can children.
What's next?
A sheer cliff covered in Teflon and Crisco, apparently.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.