Marriage Equality; does the end game begin?

[SwimExpert]

not true, many poligamous societies are matriarchal.

I think that what you are trying to say is that polygamy is sometimes practiced in a multiple husbands form, which is true, but it has been comparatively rare. A true matriarchal society in human history has yet to be readily identified. While some cultures have demonstrated certain qualities that could indicate some degree of matriarchal origin, the best analysis at this time seems to indicate that these are merely societies that have achieved great gender equality, with the seemingly matriarchal elements being nothing more than individual cultural expressions of that equality which diverge from western cultures which have strong patriarchal roots. For example, some societies trace family lineage through the maternal line. While this may superficially look like a matriarchal quality on its own to an observer from a western culture accustomed to a patriarchal society where families are defined through the male line, that element by itself does not indicate a matriarchal society. It can (and in the known cases does) merely indicate a different expression of the culture's gender equality where the value of men in society is expressed in other areas.

Polyandry (multiple husbands) and polygyny (multiple wives) are difficult to compare because they tend to occur in vastly different conditions, and are almost always exclusive of each other. Specifically, polyandry tends to be associated with cultures who have scarce resources, thus causing lower birth rates to be favorable. One very important consideration is that the most common form of polyandry is fraternal polyandry, which is the practice of multiple husbands who are related to each other (i.e. are brothers, or perhaps father and son). This practice is actually associated with male dominated societies, both historically and in the present day (as practiced today in the Kinnaur region of India).

 

[g5000]

Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases
Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases KSL.com

The time has arrived to end the whining.

If SCOTUS takes it up, I predict marriage equality nationally by the end of the term.

then get ready for brother/sister, mother/daughter, sister/sister, 3 men/4 women, et al. Because such a SCOTUS ruling would open the door for all forms of "marriage" using gay marriage as a valid legal precedent.

thats the real danger, the abnormality of homosexuality is just the foot in the door.

Slippery Slope Fallacy

Oh...magod! They let them negroes marry our white women! The next thing you know you will be able to marry a monkey!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Or each other, or themselves! The sky is falling!!

 

[Redfish]

not true, many poligamous societies are matriarchal.

I think that what you are trying to say is that polygamy is sometimes practiced in a multiple husbands form, which is true, but it has been comparatively rare. A true matriarchal society in human history has yet to be readily identified. While some cultures have demonstrated certain qualities that could indicate some degree of matriarchal origin, the best analysis at this time seems to indicate that these are merely societies that have achieved great gender equality, with the seemingly matriarchal elements being nothing more than individual cultural expressions of that equality which diverge from western cultures which have strong patriarchal roots. For example, some societies trace family lineage through the maternal line. While this may superficially look like a matriarchal quality on its own to an observer from a western culture accustomed to a patriarchal society where families are defined through the male line, that element by itself does not indicate a matriarchal society. It can (and in the known cases does) merely indicate a different expression of the culture's gender equality where the value of men in society is expressed in other areas.

Polyandry (multiple husbands) and polygyny (multiple wives) are difficult to compare because they tend to occur in vastly different conditions, and are almost always exclusive of each other. Specifically, polyandry tends to be associated with cultures who have scarce resources, thus causing lower birth rates to be favorable. One very important consideration is that the most common form of polyandry is fraternal polyandry, which is the practice of multiple husbands who are related to each other (i.e. are brothers, or perhaps father and son). This practice is actually associated with male dominated societies, both historically and in the present day (as practiced today in the Kinnaur region of India).

nice recap and definition review. But it doesn't change anything. The legal arguments for gay marriage WILL be made for multiple partner marriage. It will happen.

Now, the question for you is: will that be good or bad for society?

 

[Redfish]

Or each other, or themselves! The sky is falling!!

yes, jake. you and rightwinger can finally be married. You can marry yourself.

 

[Redfish]

Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases
Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases KSL.com

The time has arrived to end the whining.

If SCOTUS takes it up, I predict marriage equality nationally by the end of the term.

then get ready for brother/sister, mother/daughter, sister/sister, 3 men/4 women, et al. Because such a SCOTUS ruling would open the door for all forms of "marriage" using gay marriage as a valid legal precedent.

thats the real danger, the abnormality of homosexuality is just the foot in the door.

Slippery Slope Fallacy

Oh...magod! They let them negroes marry our white women! The next thing you know you will be able to marry a monkey!

race and homosexuality are not analogous no matter how many times you try to make it so.

 

[Kosh]

Equality does not exist in nature, yet the far left seems to think it does..

 

[JakeStarkey]

The crazy far right like Kosh will look foolish trying to dictate to the rest of the nation.

 

[Skylar]

Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases
Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases KSL.com

The time has arrived to end the whining.

If SCOTUS takes it up, I predict marriage equality nationally by the end of the term.

then get ready for brother/sister, mother/daughter, sister/sister, 3 men/4 women, et al. Because such a SCOTUS ruling would open the door for all forms of "marriage" using gay marriage as a valid legal precedent.

thats the real danger, the abnormality of homosexuality is just the foot in the door.

Slippery Slope Fallacy

Oh...magod! They let them negroes marry our white women! The next thing you know you will be able to marry a monkey!

race and homosexuality are not analogous no matter how many times you try to make it so.

Really? Then why does your rhetoric sound so similar to what was offered by those opposing interracial marriage?

 

[nodoginnafight]

"Equality does not exist in nature, yet the far left seems to think it does.."

Marriage doesn't exist in nature.

We invented it - we define it.
If we choose to define it equally - that's cool by me.

 

[SwimExpert]

nice recap and definition review. But it doesn't change anything. The legal arguments for gay marriage WILL be made for multiple partner marriage. It will happen.

Now, the question for you is: will that be good or bad for society?

A given argument can be used to support anything. The question is whether the quality of the argument suffices to support the specific conclusion to which it is applied.

For example, an argument in support of gun rights is that criminals will not obey restrictions anyway and therefore law abiding citizens should have the right to defend themselves. I could use the same argument for polygamy. Criminals won't obey gun laws, so people should be able to have as many wives as they want. Of course, such an argument would be of very poor quality in support of the conclusion I'd be trying to defend.

Thus, we come back to what I said in the beginning. The real argument in favor of gay marriage is that the government has no place interfering in people's personal lives when those people are simply minding their own business and not posing any harm to anyone else. Sure, someone could use the same argument for polygamy, but the argument would not have the same quality in support the that different conclusion, because polygamy does in fact pose harm to society.

 

[Silhouette]

nice recap and definition review. But it doesn't change anything. The legal arguments for gay marriage WILL be made for multiple partner marriage. It will happen.

Brown v Utah is sitting waiting in the wings as we debate this.

“Advocacy groups for polygamy and individual liberties hailed U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups’ December ruling in favor of the TLC reality show’s Kody Brown and his four wives as a landmark decision that removed the threat of arrest for plural families in Utah,” the story reports.
The ruling was made final about a month ago, although Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes will file an appeal in about two weeks, the piece notes.
The AP report adds: “Reyes’ chief of staff, Parker Douglas, said it is office policy to defend any law that is challenged for constitutionality so long as there is a defense. He said they aren’t taking any political position, but rather seeking clarity so state residents know the reach of the state’s polygamy law.”
The attorney for the Brown family wasn’t immediately available for comment. The family’s attorney has previously said that the family is ready to take the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah Polygamy Law in Focus as Sister Wives Ruling Heads for Appeal TVWeek

What is the legal difference between homosexual and polysexual marriage? The traditional number of two? Isn't man/woman also traditional?

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are talking about traditional marriage, which is two people.

Polygamy should not come up, but if it does in arguments, SCOTUS will simply point their fingers at their head and roll their eyes.

You folks have long gone through the bottom of the barrel and are digging for China.

 

[Redfish]

We are talking about traditional marriage, which is two people.

Polygamy should not come up, but if it does in arguments, SCOTUS will simply point their fingers at their head and roll their eyes.

You folks have long gone through the bottom of the barrel and are digging for China.

no, snake. It will come up, the polysexual advocates will use exactly the same arguments being used by the gay marriage advocates, and they will win if you win. But our society will lose and crumble. Liberalism always destroys societies, study a little world history, you might learn something.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are as silly as Sil and Where.

Your fallacy of logic has been clearly explained to you time and again, so, SCOTUS will say, "you don't get just once more."

 

[Skylar]

nice recap and definition review. But it doesn't change anything. The legal arguments for gay marriage WILL be made for multiple partner marriage. It will happen.

Brown v Utah is sitting waiting in the wings as we debate this.

“Advocacy groups for polygamy and individual liberties hailed U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups’ December ruling in favor of the TLC reality show’s Kody Brown and his four wives as a landmark decision that removed the threat of arrest for plural families in Utah,” the story reports.
The ruling was made final about a month ago, although Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes will file an appeal in about two weeks, the piece notes.
The AP report adds: “Reyes’ chief of staff, Parker Douglas, said it is office policy to defend any law that is challenged for constitutionality so long as there is a defense. He said they aren’t taking any political position, but rather seeking clarity so state residents know the reach of the state’s polygamy law.”
The attorney for the Brown family wasn’t immediately available for comment. The family’s attorney has previously said that the family is ready to take the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah Polygamy Law in Focus as Sister Wives Ruling Heads for Appeal TVWeek

What is the legal difference between homosexual and polysexual marriage? The traditional number of two? Isn't man/woman also traditional?

Has 'Brown v. Utah' been distributed for conference with the USSC? Has a petition for cert even been submitted?

You don't want to discuss gay marriage anymore, as you lost that debate. Remember that.

 

[Silhouette]

Has 'Brown v. Utah' been distributed for conference with the USSC? Has a petition for cert even been submitted?

You don't want to discuss gay marriage anymore, as you lost that debate. Remember that.

Their lawyer, Jonathan Turley is a constitutional attorney, and a good one. They didn't hire him out of a firm that specialize in ambulance-chasers.. And they aren't stupid. They are staying quiet on-order from him until and if gay marraige is turned from the state-granted privelege Windsor affirmed it is now, to a federally-forced "right" where states have to incentivize ANY type of formative environment for kids. A total free-for-all. Don't want to tip the public off at this stage in the game. Shhhhhhh...

Once "marriage equality" (keyword: equality) becomes a right (keyword: right), no person or combination of them consenting and wanting to be married will be able to be legally denied by any state, for any reason. This is simple, legal deduction.

If the homosexuals get a federal-mandate on marriage, the monosexuals (single parents), polysexuals (polygamists) and ?? would be such an easy win that you could hire an ambulance chaser to bring off that victory with a blindfold on and both hands tied behind his back. Jonathan Turley will accomplish it in a nanosecond.

 

[Skylar]

Has 'Brown v. Utah' been distributed for conference with the USSC? Has a petition for cert even been submitted?

You don't want to discuss gay marriage anymore, as you lost that debate. Remember that.

Their lawyer, Jonathan Turley is a constitutional attorney, and a good one. They didn't hire him out of a firm that specialize in ambulance-chasers.. And they aren't stupid. They are staying quiet on-order from him until and if gay marraige is turned from the state-granted privelege Windsor affirmed it is now, to a federally-forced "right" where states have to incentivize ANY type of formative environment for kids. A total free-for-all. Don't want to tip the public off at this stage in the game. Shhhhhhh...

And has 'Brown v. Utah' been distributed for conference with the USSC? Has a petition for cert even been submitted?

You've abandoned your claims regarding gay marriage, Silo. If you're going to treat your own claims like useless flotsam to be tossed on the rhetorical midden heap, surely you can understand when we treat your claims the same way.