Amazon.com Widgets

Now Polygamists Want Equal Marriage Rights. Where Will The Slippery Slope End?

Asked by: JustCheNo
  • "YES" For The End Of America. "NO" For I Don't Care If People Marry Their Dogs.

    You must have seen this coming. Several Polygamist couples have already filed lawsuits in Utah for marriage discrimination. They say that if gays have the right to marry so should they. Only 13 countries in the world recognize same sex marriage, but over 50 recognize polygamist marriages. Where do you think Obama will stand on this issue considering that his own father was married to two women at the same time? Where will it end?

  • It ends at freewill

    Polygamy should be accepted as long as it’s done in freewill. Laws regarding an act should be created based on the victims it creates. I assume two dads can mess up a kid as bad as three moms and a dad and one mom and one dad. Lines must be drawn when actions are directly harmful to a third party, such as a kid born from incest that has a significantly higher rate of birth defects.

  • I believe in group marriage. Many communities of people throughout history lived together and had many children together without there being a problem.

    Yes I support group marriage rights!
    If I want 3 husbands and 3 wives and want to
    live together in a small community and have sex
    with each other and have children I think that is
    the way it was for many years and to deny people their
    rights because they are in a group marriage is and should be unconstitutional.

  • No religious persecution

    If the people in the marriage are happy and are not forced to be in the marriage then why shouldn't they have equal rights when it comes to marriage as well. It's not really suitable for me but if the way they want to live then they should have the right to.

  • This isn't a yes or no question but I suppose the "No" column is implied

    Bottom line. Governments exist to manage conflicts between people. Your personal feelings of disgust or revulsion at other people's lifestyle choices is not a conflict, it's your personal business and your personal business over something that is not a real social conflict should not be turned into a social conflict by the government no matter how many people or how intensely they feel something is disgusting.
    Though I personally agree that sex abuse involving animals and children is horrifying and disgusting that's not why I support government action against it. It's because these acts infringe on non-consenting others. Homosexuality/gay marriage, polyamory/polygamy, and incest (meaning adults-only)/incest marriage do NOT. Even though I personally am put off by the idea of having sexual relations with a close family member I'm not going to go perpetuate conflict by promoting laws against those relationships instead I choose to support peace and say leave them alone and don't deny them legal benefits afforded to other consenting adults. That's what marriage is_a legal benefit, a legal benefit to share assets. Even two people who are just friends but want to raise kids together might want it so I think we should rename "marriage" civil unions since they may not even think of themselves as married in a spiritual sense but that's a minor point as you could just use the word "married" to refer to the contract part and the benefits.
    Some people claim polygamy will promote sexism but not all polygamists are sexists and those who are still live together and usually the husband will then will his property to a brother or other male relative and the women have to leave or live under or even marry him because it's his property. But if legal polygamist marriages could be held Mormon polygamist wives will pressure their husbands to get married and saying "no" just to control inheritance might work in some circles but not all, so then more women living in polygamist-style relationships would have legal protections in inheritance and other matters.

  • I believe it's about basic human rights.

    If a person wants to marry the same-sex, two people or more or the opposite sex- it's their business. A human being should have the right to marry whatever sex and how many people they want as long as all people involved are of consenting adult age. Marriage is basically saying you are committed to the person/people involved. I do care if people marry their dogs because that's a completely different species and the dog isn't exactly able to "consent" to the marriage or voice their opinion, can they? So I would be against that. I see no slippery slope, I see tolerance and acceptance in continued human understanding.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Quan says2013-06-27T15:47:33.710
Marriage is more or less meaningless now anyway.
Anonymous says2013-06-28T02:19:20.930
Quan is right.