3 ms·
Why the downvotes? Is that not a valid point? Or is it bad because it's a point used by the opposing side? Or is the problem the way it was stated?
by talmand 11y ago
Why the downvotes? Is that not a valid point? Or is it bad because it's a point used by the opposing side? Or is the problem the way it was stated?
- coldpie 11y agoSSM and polygamy are not really related issues. You run into very complicated issues when you consider how children and property ownership would work in a many-person relationship. Marriage specifies shortcuts for these kinds of things, but they only work for two-person relationships. Polygamous relationships would basically require unique contracts given all circumstances, which is a pretty high burden. It's also not clear that polygamous marriages would have the same kind of societal benefits that two-person marriages have. I think it's a point that can be convincingly argued, but the legalization of SSM does not imply a requirement for polygamous marriage's legalization. They're entirely different issues.
- foolinaround 11y agoI am arguing that they are related. re: children; in a gay marriage, at best the child belongs to one of the parents, at worst: it is adopted. How is it different from polygamy. Regarding property ownership: polygamy has been historically done is so many cultures that there is prior art & legal framework. polygamy's legitimacy was taken away, unlike gay marriage, where it was never legitimate. Both were illegitimate because of moral reasons. And now, that is being whittled away....