In the 20 states where gay marriage bans remain, what's next?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

*pact

(that annoyed me enough to get me to log on and type on the old handphone)

Well who knew. I am honored you would go to that much trouble just for little ol me .

I saw mine there this weekend.

It's really amazing.Coach is soooooo yesterday

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

So to marry and have sex with someone of the same sex is ok, but to marry and have sex with two or more of the opposite sex shouldn't be allowed?? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

So to marry and have sex with someone of the same sex is ok, but to marry and have sex with two or more of the opposite sex shouldn't be allowed?? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

Our Govt has no business interceding in whatever relationships, consenting Adults wish to engage in. If 6 men want to marry one woman, it's none of my business.

[JohnR! 5,495]

In the US that is already allowed.

So to marry and have sex with someone of the same sex is ok, but to marry and have sex with two or more of the opposite sex shouldn't be allowed?? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

In the US that is already allowed.

If you mean at the same time as the rest of us do, where? I wasn't aware polygamy was legal in the US.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Polygamy isn't legal in the US, but marrying and having sex with two or more of the opposite sex - as you stated - is allowed. Many Americans have been married twice or three times, in some cases. One of my neighbors is in his third catalog bride, for that matter.

However, if you are particularly interested in legalizing polygamy, get a lawyer and start a lawsuit, just like our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters did. Talking alone ain't gonna get you anywhere.

If you mean at the same time as the rest of us do, where? I wasn't aware polygamy was legal in the US.

Edited October 9, 2014 by JohnR!

[GandD 5,966]

So to marry and have sex with someone of the same sex is ok, but to marry and have sex with two or more of the opposite sex shouldn't be allowed?? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

Well, some people think that marriage is a bond between two people, regardless of their sex. Polygamy is no closer to homosexual marriage than it is heterosexual marriage really. I still don't have a problem with any of it really.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, some people think that marriage is a bond between two people, regardless of their sex. Polygamy is no closer to homosexual marriage than it is heterosexual marriage really. I still don't have a problem with any of it really.

The argument is that because of gay marriage, the entire concept of marriage should be ditched to accommodate every alternative lifestyle out there. I don't buy it.

There are clear ethical and practical reasons why polygamy isn't comparable to gay marriage.

[GandD 5,966]

The argument is that because of gay marriage, the entire concept of marriage should be ditched to accommodate every alternative lifestyle out there. I don't buy it.

There are clear ethical and practical reasons why polygamy isn't comparable to gay marriage.

I also, do not buy it. Not everything is a slippery slope.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The argument is that because of gay marriage, the entire concept of marriage should be ditched to accommodate every alternative lifestyle out there. I don't buy it.

There are clear ethical and practical reasons why polygamy isn't comparable to gay marriage.

Not only that - it is as comparable to gay marriage as it is to hetero marriage. And yet, nobody ever brings up polygamy in the context of the latter although polygamy was traditionally a heterosexual concept of marriage. But you're right, it's brought up in the context of gay marriage to lead the discussion towards the useless slippery slope argument which ultimately leads to the discussion of incest and bestiality as well. And that is really the ultimate goal of the strategy - to equate gay marriage with bestiality.

[JohnR! 5,495]

In all fairness the subject is being kept within one same species. I am surprised we've not devolved into the old 'so does that mean I can marry my petrock or fern tree as well'... Slowly we're making progress!!

I also, do not buy it. Not everything is a slippery slope.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I also, do not buy it. Not everything is a slippery slope.

Indeed. And there's a definite agenda at work in trying to create the impression that it is.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Indeed. And there's a definite agenda at work in trying to create the impression that it is.

It's the only argument they have left.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

I'm not trying to compare polygamy to gay marriage other than from the POV that if two people are free to marry (regardless of sex), why not three or more? What if three guys want to marry? Why can't they?

[JohnR! 5,495]

Because currently the law doesn't allow them to do so. In order to change that, legislation would need to be changed. It is no different than any other change in legislation in our country. The process would be the same to rezone an area for commercial use or lower/raise the drinking age, for want of more complex examples.

I'm not trying to compare polygamy to gay marriage other than from the POV that if two people are free to marry (regardless of sex), why not three or more? What if three guys want to marry? Why can't they?

Edited October 9, 2014 by JohnR!