user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I guess they use the same argument as they do for gay marriages, one man one women in Holy matrimony. Holy is the word that complicates it all, and the word according to our constitution shouldn't be a factor, should it?
What is between consenting adults is no concern of the government.
by ABC on Sat Jun 24, 06 3:41pm
[+]
.... Providing women get to marry multiple partners, too. :) Actually, I'm joking. Polygamy is for doormats, imo. I feel sorry for people (women) who're content with that kind of living arrangement, and I want to slap those smug men who think they're IT because they've managed to convince a bunch of brainwashed females that they're somehow 'God's Gift' to the fairer sex.
^ Having said that, if it's their own choice, then it's no-one else's business.
The reasons why I believe that polygamy should not be legalized.First the American system of justice is based on precedence,that is judges use rulings from past cases to guide their decisions in current cases.That being said in our 300+ years as a nation the Supreme Court has never ruled in favor of polygamy and thus there is no legal precedent to support the legalization of polygamy.
zig, yes, it should be legal much like polygyny (one woman + multi men) should be ok under the law. It's rediculous that the society turns blind eye to those men who sire multiple children by multiple women (or vice versa) without marriage is accepted/tolerated, and those who make the commitment is punished. That's total hypocracy in my book.
by LCD on Sat Jun 24, 06 3:57pm
[+]
wait that's not the right word... I can't remember what they call that...
by LCD on Sat Jun 24, 06 4:02pm
[+]
Good point.
If you put it that way, then I guess I can't put up an argument against it. My only problem with polygamy is that it's totally frelling stupid. In this day and age, it's hard enough to make *one* person happy in a relationship. Two or more at a time? Now, suicide *is* illegal...
^Which would bring up another question, Truthseeker013 : How do you enforce THAT?!
If your premise here is that if we legalize gay marriage, then we'd have to legalize polygamy and polyandry as well, then it doesn't track. Gay marriage, so far as I have heard, is between TWO same-sexed partners. Polygamy and polyandry is marriage between multiple partners. The two are unrelated. Now, if you are arguing that the U.S. Constitution gives all of us "equal protection" under the law, then I'd say that might be a connection. How is it that the government gets involved in this business at all? If I wanted to marry my cat, I'd just conjure up a private ceremony, not ask the government for permission, and marry her. Nonetheless, your points are not necessarily related. But when did that stop any of us, eh?
^I'm just saying that some anti-gay activists have used the argument which is quoted in the title.
^ yeah, I've heard that argument too
No way I can see. HomeSec does have its eyes and ears everywhere, so maybe we could leave it to them.
|
|