Protect and Defend

Welcome to my blog, Protect and Defend. You don’t have to understand me. You only have to agree with me. I can live with losing the good fight, but I can not live with not fighting that good fight at all. - Publius

Monday, March 20, 2006

Polygamy and Gay Marriage

In 2003, when Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) told the associated press that legalizing gay marriage would pave the way for legalizing bigamy, polygamy, and incest, this angered gay-rights activist who perceive gay marriage and polygamy to be separate issues. But, it turns out that polygamy advocates do not see gay marriage and polygamy to be separate issues. Mark Henkel, founder of the Christian evangelical polygamy organization, said “Polygamy rights is the next civil-rights battle,” adding that if Heather can have two mommies, she should also be able to have two mommies and a daddy (Newsweek, March 20, 2006). Using the same legal precedent set forward in Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 sodomy case where the Supreme Court ruled that individuals have “the full right to engage in private conduct without government intervention,” gay marriage and polygamy advocates are pushing forward hoping to achieve the right to homosexual marriages and polygamy marriages (Newsweek, March 20, 2006). As it turns out, one can lead to the other, with bigamy and possibly incest not being too far behind once the precedent is set; the issues are all tied together after all. Unless America decides that they are going to support polygamy and bigamy they must prevent gay marriage, otherwise the “slippery slope” that Sen. Santorum mentioned in 2003 will not be an outlandish comment but our reality.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I still for the life of me can't figure out why someone would want more than one is enough. Gosh, what if they decided to mutiny! Anyhoo, it's too bad that gay marriage and polygamy are being lumped in together as one. As it is, I see no problem with gay marriage, two people find each other, fall in love and want to spend their lives together..what's the problem? People should be allowed to live their lives, to a degree, as they wish. I guess I come from the side of the argument that being gay is not a choice, but how the individual is made up. Polygamy, bigamy and incest are choices people make. And, imho, weird ones. It seems like two seemingly different issues have been lumped together here for the benefit of some peoples agendas. The polygamists may have tried to hop on a bandwagon to try to sneak their cause in. Politicians may have tried to lump them together to keep gays from being able to be married.

Tue Mar 21, 12:39:00 PM  
Blogger Oncorhynchus Mykiss said...

Strangley and inexplicably, I can see where a republican is coming from on this one. Religion aside, they way that the STATE looks at legal gay marriage (a voluntary union between two people who are in love) and legal polygamy are essentially the same, save for the word "two". In his book "Under the Banner of Heaven", John Krakauer pointed out that there are some strange bedfellows among gays and fundamentalist Mormons who support polygamy. They believe that there is no statutory differnece in the spirit of the laws allowing gay marriage and those that might allow polygamy. There are, of course, huge differences. Women in polygamous relationships in the past were often 9-17 years old, pushed into it involuntarily, and were suspected of having suffered from religious brainwashing. These are not problems among gay couples. But it will be interesting to see how laws allowing certain unions and not others are worded, as just saying "only 2 people can be in the marriage" could be deemed exclusionary and unconstitutional.

Wed Mar 22, 12:25:00 PM  
Blogger Publius said...

But, the fact that they have been lumped together means that that they can not be treated separately. In fact we do have slippery slope here that is gay marriage is allowed than a precedent is set to allow other forms of alternative families. And whereas opponents of gay marriage point out that homosexuality goes against nature, polygamy advocated can say that polygamy is in-step with nature by guaranteeing the survival of the species. It only takes one male to prolong a species; 1 million women and 1 man can guarantee the survival of a species but the opposite is not true of 1 million men and 1 woman. Whether you do or do not think the issues should be linked is immaterial they are and have been and one can not be accepted without the other.

Wed Mar 22, 12:28:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, I'm really at a loss here. I can see the argument for lumping all of the "alternative" forms of marriage together, but I feel like they are so different. In the long run, people are going to do what they want to do in terms of their relationships. Gay couples will live together, legally married or not, and I think Polygamists will continue to keep a harem, again, legally married or not. We could go in the other direction completely and say unless everyone is allowed to do it, No one is allowed to do it. Then it's totally fair. how bad would that suck?

Wed Mar 22, 01:02:00 PM  
Blogger Publius said...

But, once you understand that you can’t have one without the other, you have to make the decision are you willing to accept both. Allowing gay marriage will allow polygamy, and allowing polygamy will allow gay marriage; one opens the door for the other. As of right now the law allows homosexuality and it allows a person to date and impregnate as many people as they want, it just does not allow for gay marriage and polygamy. I don’t understand why people argue that the government should not dictate who should and should not be allowed to marry while actively petitioning the government to allow them to marry.

Thu Mar 23, 05:45:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home