Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Alternative Marriages

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
KensPen Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 09:35 AM
Original message
Alternative Marriages
Why does it scare the right wingers soooooo much?

The recent case of Bigamy that surfaced had the rightwingers on the radio decrying the recent court decisions on sodomy and gay marriage as the beginning of the end....

Now in this particular case of bigomy one of his "wives" was 13 which is a seperate matter entirely...

BUT

Why does the government feel it has the right to limit a bonding between consenting adults.

Be it man and man, or woman and woman or....

in the case of bigamy, as long as all the parties involved are aware of the situation and consent... what is wrong?


I support the right of a church to decline to perform a ceremony they consider outside the boundries of their faith,
but...
as far as our government denying the legal rights and protections associated with marriage because it offends their morality....

well again...

butt out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
eyesroll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. I can see maybe -- MAYBE -- a problem with polygamy and taxes
...since the tax rates are based on groups of one or two people, plus their dependants.

But then again, I'm not a fan of taxing people differently based on their marital status anyway. Treat everyone as single, and let married people split income and deductions evenly.

I can't see how it's any of the government's business if a group of more than two wanted to live together as a romantic or family unit, unless:
1. Someone is a child or otherwise unable to legally consent
2. Someone is being coerced or forced (which is, sadly, often the case with polygamy)
3. They are trying to cheat the system (I know that one guy, on the Utah-Idaho border, was gaming the system for an obscene amount of government assistance.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. I love how you make this a right wing thing
Sorry but most democrats and republicans can agree on the bigamy thing being unacceptable. Gay marriage is a seperate issue completely.

BTW - why do some of you work so hard to prove that prick Santorum right, at the expense of gays? one of the most hateful things the man said was that if you gave gays rights, the crackpots woul dbe coming out of the woodwork to demand things like bigamy. And look here you are doing exactly that.

Some people just refuse to think of social consequence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KensPen Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Well aren't you issue driven?
so it's ok for a gay marriage,

but you must be a crackpot to think of any other form of alternate marriage. I think that shows some hypocrisy on your end.

I think there have been MANY cultures throughout history that have had some form of "group" marriage. And I think that if such a union is desired why should laws be there to ban it?

I limited my position to involve only willing and understanding adults. So why dismiss such people as "crackpots"...
tsk tsk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Drawing a line is not hypocrisy
Just because I don't believe in a strict dress code in schools, does not mean that I should support naked students. There is such thing as taking something too far.

I don't really care what cultures have gone for the multi spouse game, it hasn't been wanted here in the States. So if you find yourself wishing for the state to endorse your lack of self control go find a nation that better fits your views on relationships.

Nations have cultures folks, and it's not fair to demand the distruction of this ones everytime you get a bright idea. I know many of you respect the cultures of other nations, its about time you start respecting this ones as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Go do your historical research Chill
Bigamy and polygamy have been present throughout our history, from the days of the early religious communes in colonial times up to the present day. There were several religious communes in the "Burnt Over District" of New England that practiced polygamy. There is the obvious example of the Mormons, a group that not only practiced polygamy, but went on to found a state. Then there are the precious metal rushs, gold in CA, silver in CO, and gold in Alaska, where it was a common practice for a woman(very scarce out there) to have multiple husbands. Then there were the free love movements in the early part of the twentieth century that resulted in group marriage, the sixties, where the result was the same, throw in some throwback old time Mormons, some interesting religious cults, and you realize that polygamy and bigamy have run as a cultural undercurrent all throughout US history.

And then there is the great Judeo-Christian tradition of practicing polygamy. How many wives did Solomon have again? And stating that somebody who practices either polygamy or bigamy as lacking in self control is disingenous at best. Who has more self control, the polygamous group that stay faithful to itself, or the serial monogomist who goes through fifteen partners in just as many months? Get over your Puritan hangups Chill, group love may not be your cup of tea(nor is it mine), but don't go trying to impose your morals on the rest of us. There are people who wish to participate in such a relationship, and if all parties are adults and consenting, why should this be illegal? Because it violates some tightass' idea of morality?! Give me a break, that's exactly what they have said about interracial marriage and gay marriage.

And speaking of cultures, you should really go do some research before you start preaching to people to start respecting ours. You will find some cultural traits that you might find pretty unsavory. Chiding others for lack of respect when you don't know the full story is not a bright nor right thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KensPen Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. thank you....
for providing a much better retort than I would have crafted by myself.

Chill seems a little issue blind. Citing a desire for us to respect what he perceives as the culture of this country, while expressing a desire to see gay marriage. That in itself was a little bit of a logic flaw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. Tell me more about this multiple husband thing
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Plural marriage was very much wanted for a time
among the Mormons. They were persecuted for it and eventually renounced it in favor of statehood.

For the record, what is the problem with living arrangements among consenting adults? I have none.

Marriage, as the term is currently defined, is another matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
library_max Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. Well, how else do you make the case?
If you say that the penumbra of privacy (based, I believe, on the fourth, ninth, and tenth amendments) extends to legal covenants between consenting adults, how can you include same-sex marriage and exclude polygamy (assuming consent and adult status)? How do you make the case legally that same-sex marriage/civil union is protected under the Constitution but multiple-partner marriage/civil union is not?

The rest of it (pedophilia, bestiality, etc.) evaporates under the light of "consent." But what is so horrible about polygamy among consenting adults? It's a practice that goes back at least as far as man-woman marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
5. The religious right demands we conform to their definitions
whether it is their definition of what constitutes a marriage, when life starts, or whether murder can be justified. They do this by insisting on the tenets of the Christian church as both "natural" and the basis of our government, neither of which is accurate. The more they (or we) threaten us with the lower end of the slippery slope, whether that's bestiality, forced abortion, etc., the more they are able to muster support from religious people who don't necessarily agree with them.

It's not about marriage... it's about control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TNOE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
6. I was thinking about this last night....
the Government should not be involved in anyone's personal life in any way. I was wondering back to the Bible days - I'm sure whoever got married didn't have to go the Court House and obtain a marriage license, etc., etc.

This should not be a government issue - but a personal one - and if the Church doesn't want to marry you - sobeit - you should be able to do it outside in the Universe or in your home. The Republicans say they are such staunch supporters of the Constitution - except when it comes to anything this administration seems to want to do - and if they think it goes against their Bible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. You sound like a libertarian
Personally, I think that's where we need to focus our energies to encourage the split of the Republican party: the hypocrisy of supporting both "leave government out of this" economic policies and "keep control over public morality" religious right social policies. The GOP is primed to take a fall for this in the not too distant future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
11. The right wingers are scared
Cuz we look so cool at our weddings and they don't!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
New Lefty Donating Member (6 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Evolution is the answer to your question.
Human evolution can explain why we shun polygamy and accept same sex partnerships. Like many other lower forms of life on this planet, the urge to copulate with more than one mate helped ensure survival of the species. Copulation in lower forms is mainly for reproductive purposes.

As humans evolved we have shed that need. Sex is less about survival and more about social interaction and pleasure now. Likewise, because sex has evolved beyond survival of the species, same sex relationships are less risk to that survival.

Humans are still evolving. Let us not forget that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Hi New Lefty!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bushisanidiot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-03 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
15. I See It More As An Equality Issue
Gays are excluded from marriage rights. Het's can marry het's, just one at a time, but at least they can marry. het's who complain they can only marry one het at a time are just plain fucking spoiled if you ask me. at least they have the right to marry the person they love!

to lump gay marriage in with polygamy is just wrong. first gays need equal marriage rights then if we're talking about rights to polygamy then we're talking about rights for both het and gay polygamy. i will NOT fight that fight, sorry.

i just want the right to marry my partner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC