Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hazzard
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute
If gay marriage is legal, then polygamy would have to be legal.
|
I disagree.
The legal and political underpinnings of the arguments favoring gay marriage are different than those favoring polygamy, thus the results may be different.
Gay marriage advocates, if I understand correctly, argue that if straight people have the right to marry their natural partners (members of the opposite sex), then gay people should also have the right to marry their natural partners (members of the same sex). It's an argument based on equal protection and/or the preservation of liberty.
Polygamy advocates argue, I presume, that the First Amendment's freedom of religion clause makes anti-polygamy laws unconstitutional. It's an argument based on freedom of religion, not equal protection. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
il Padrino, I assume the premise for your argument is that there is "straight marriage," then "all other kinds of marriage." If that is the foundation for your argument, and I think it's fair to a certain degree, then you would group gay marriage in with polygamy and all other alternative forms of marriage. The logical result would therefore be that if one alternative form of marriage is legal then all the others must be legal. But I believe the two groups are arguing from different legal and philosophical positions and thus we must consider their arguments separately. |
I am not a lawyer but such legal maneuverings in the fight to legalize gay marriage do not remain in the neat little bubble you have constructed. The ramifications for legalizing same sex marriage are far reaching and will affect future efforts to legalize polygamy.
Precedence in such cases will in fact be relied upon as momentum to drive any argument in favor of any other type of government sanctioned marriage.
The ultimate question is at what point do the rights of one group usurp the rights of another group? This will become an issue of free speech … is it possible for a government to sanction gay marriage and at the same time sanction the freedom of religious worship to vocally condemn it? You are naïve if you believe that the fight is truly about the right to marry!