Will Gay Marraige Set a Precedent For Polygamy?

It has not passed because they simply aren't as flush with cash like gay activists organizations are. They're sitting and waiting for the precedent to be set and then they're going to march their case on a greased track right into law. You know I'm for preserving "between one man and one woman" as a social icon to pass on to future generations as normal. Stop asking the same question over and over "what would be so bad..". You're not going to trap me in some snare you've set. Save yourself the time and energy.

 

That appears to be a tacit admission that you do not believe there is grass roots support for your position...that cash would be needed to create it.

As long as you remain a minority, I am ok with that. There are still people in America that do not have a problem with slavery either.

 

Well, I guess you have nothing to worry about then.

If you're going to object to something (that isn't even been discussed by anyone but you) you should at least explain the nature of your objection. "Just because" doesn't work.

 

Yes, a minority. Just like the "minority" who upheld Prop 8 in California...

You left out the part about polygamists waiting for gays to dissolve marriage in precedent. Did you mean to leave that part out? It's integral to my point.

 

Because it only exists in your twisted imagination.

 

I know how hard it is for you to keep your relationship without swearing it to God. You have my sympathy.

 

If the government is really as corrupt as you seem to think it is, you've already lost.

 

Certainly.

As a tactical matter, no, they can't take that on and hope to be successful in the current climate. But if they wanted to fight on principle, yes, polygamy would be part of their fight.

 

Silliness.

More silliness.

You forgot the little matter of consent.

No doubt....

 

can you name any of the 14+ countries or 10 states in the US who have pushed for polygamy to be legalized after same sex marriage?

- - - Updated - - -

but this statement, like all your other "I hate gays" claims is totally unsubstantiated.

 

1; The Government is not automatically involved in a divorce. You can get divorced without ever setting foot in a court.

2; None of those regulations require the government to dictate marriage rights in order to function.

 

I'm sorry what are we discussing now

 

1. Nope. The final decree is done in court, even when settling outside of a court room.

2. All marriage contract are legal documents governed by state law.

 

After an astonishing few minutes reading this thread in its entirety I'm not exactly sure what I'm witnessing. What it looks like is one person who's tried every anti gay-marriage argument he could think of only to get shot down, so he's picking some other thing that's only marginally similar to gay marriage and he's trying to argue violently against it instead. Except nobody else seems to care one way or the other about plural marriage.

Or is there something I'm missing? Aside from this thread I've heard precisely zero talk about polygamy being at the end of the slippery slope. Animals and children, yes, but those are both examples of something sane people all agree do not involve consent so they're not the same at all. Why this obsession with polygamy?

Do you (OP) really think that as soon as the ink dries on whatever agreement end up in place to allow gay marriage thousands of put-upon polygamists will descend up Washington, thousands of station wagons and Ford Explorers full of the invisible minority we didn't even know were oppressed until now? Why, if this minority exists, have they been so quiet since...since forever, basically? What kind of a strategy is that? Surely making their case slowly and carefully over 30 years, like gay marriage advocates did, is a much smarter plan.

I'm not really asking these questions. Allowing gay marriage will not open the door to plural marriage any more than allowing straight marriages helped with the gay marriage cause. At least hetero marriage and SSM are so similar as to indistinguishable from one another. 15 minutes with Find and Replace and you've got your laws all sorted out, and you're just giving a group of people the same rights everyone else had.

Polygamists have never been prohibited from marrying who they wanted, unless they were gay, I guess. But they are hardly an oppressed minority, are they? When was the last time you heard about a bunch of rednecks dragging a polygamist behind a pickup truck until the died? Ever heard of Bigamy-Bashing? Me neither.

So what did I miss? Are they talking about this on FOX or something? Why the sudden fear of polygamy?

 

Polygamy would be a tax man's nightmare. I don't care if you marry a goat (though PETA might). It's up to you.

 

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Why is it any of your business?

- - - Updated - - -

Not exactly unbiased poll questions.

 

You can dismiss my observations as "silliness", but you don't trouble yourself to tell why they're "silly", or (more importantly) how the State could forbid exactly the hypothetical situation I described once the Pandora's Box of queer-marriage is opened and its contents dumped on the national floor!

The hyperlib response to State-supported queer-marriage appears to be the same as that which it has to so much else: that we'll need to go ahead and recklessly infect our society with it in order to find out what it does (like Obamacare).... "Get yer ass in here and and satisfy your good ol' Uncle Donny -- wait -- I mean, your husband Donny -- me! And bring Fido with you -- our other husband/wife/whatever... I feel like havin' me a ménages à trois!

 

Come now, drop the drama. You know all it will take is one polygamist group and one lawsuit to make polygamy legal alongside so-called gay marriage. You talk as if readers here don't know how legal precedent opens the doors for others same or similar to walk through. Luckily Justices of the Supreme Court are intimately familiar with setting precedent for "same or similar". Why just "GLBTs"...oh, wait, that's right, "Ts" have been dumped on the side of the road for now and it's just "GLBs"? Why not other sexual practices such as polyamory? This will be a direct question levelled at pro just-gay-lesbian attorneys in the hearing coming up...

The Supreme Court must be ever and uber-aware of setting a precedent they cannot walk back once the ink has dried on their signatures.

 

So what? Nobody cares. If poly marriage is legalized, the sun will rise in the east, the birds will sing, and the grass will grow. Life will continue, and it's unlikely most people will even notice.

 

You didn't miss anything- this is as you described it- one persons nutty anti-gay campaign- just in this case she raises the straw man of "What about polygamy".

Meanwhile I am for two persons of the sex having the same rights and responsibilities of marriage as my wife and I am- nothing more, nothing less.

- - - Updated - - -

How ironic- you telling others to drop the drama? This whole thread is nothing but drama. There is no move to legalize polygamy. This is just another of your overly dramatic anti-gray threads.

 

Well you keep doing what feels good to you.....just remember your dog can't consent to have sex with you....

 

If nobody cares or wouldn't notice, why aren't gays marching arm in arm with polygamists to the Supreme Court next week? Why aren't you standing up for all oppressed non-traditional sexual behaviors and only just a select few?

I think that if the majority of non-gay gay-marriage supporters [oh, like bleeding heart housewives] were to discover today that gay marriage means they might have to also share their husband with another wife or four [potentially younger and prettier than they are], their views on gay marriage support would do an about-face in a nanosecond. And you know it but are pretending to not undertstand it dental floss...

 

Because this is entirely your strawman.

I support the right of a same gender couple who wants to get married to have the same rights and obligations as my wife and i enjoy.

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

I have some bad news for you. Poly people are ALREADY in poly relationships. There isn't a single bleeding heart housewife who is going to be forced into one against her will.

 

That's not how a majority of them would see it. It would strike them at a visceral level...a thing you know all too well and are being dishonest by pretending you don't. That is THE SPECIFIC reason polygamists have been booted out of the "help oppressed non-traditional sexuals marry" steamroller. About 90% of their non-gay bleeding-heart female supporters would vanish as quickly as a puddle of pee on a desert highway at noon in the middle of Summer.