(Senator) Gordon Smith apologizes for comment seemingly linking polygamy, same-sex marriage

[sabra]

Source: The Oregonian

Sen. Gordon Smith issued a strong apology Tuesday for his remarks last week that some interpreted as a defense of polygamy, others as equating polygamy with same-sex marriage.

In an interview with The Oregonian, Smith said he regrets bringing up his Mormon past in connection with the debate over gay marriage. He said he remains staunch in his belief that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

"My remarks referenced a point in time when a few of my ancestors were persecuted for not adhering to that belief," Smith said. "It was an unfortunate reference, and I apologize for making it."

At a gay-rights panel discussion last week, Smith was asked why he supports a federal ban on gay marriage while also supporting many gay rights. Smith responded that his Mormon ancestors "were literally driven from the United States in the dead of winter for following their religious beliefs."

"Part of what I fear, as you start defining marriage -- we have a long history of doing that in this country, and my Mormon pioneer ancestors were the victims of that."

Read more: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/121375773992080.xml&coll=7

[arcos]

1. Bye, bye, Macaca... nt

[newmajority]

2. Meanwhile, Mrs. Smith, Mrs. Smith, and Mrs. Smith were unavailable for comment......

Hey Gordon.... isn't there a difference between marrying ONE person and marrying several, like your great great great great grandpa Joe did?

[iamahaingttta]

3. Personally, I think he was right...

...and shouldn't have apologized.

"Talking about polygamy and same-sex unions in the same breath -- on the face it's offensive," said Frank Dixon, a Democratic Party and gay-rights activist. "Maybe he can explain his way out of it."

Why the hell is that offensive? Maybe the way the Mormons practiced it was offensive - forcing women to marry much older men - but if I were to choose to have two wives, how is that really any different than if I chose to have a husband?

I think Smith is a hypocrite, and I think the people in LGBT who are decrying him are hypocrites as well.

Same-sex marriage/group marriage - how are these issues REALLY any different?

Please note: I ask this as someone who spent a number of years in a polyfidelitous group "marriage." It was against the law then, and it's against the law now. Why should people who choose to live that lifestyle be treated any differently than homosexuals who want to, and should be allowed to, get married?

[jmondine]

4. I agree

The problem with polygamy as practiced in Mormonism and other traditionally patriarchical cultures is not the multiple partner aspect, and the fact that it flies in the face of "normal" life. It's the double standard (only men can have multiple partners), the treatment of people (specifically women) as property, and the subjugation of minors.

If a man was doing these things to just one woman, it wouldn't make it any less wrong just because it's "monogamous".

[Laughing Mirror]

8. Why? Because being gay is not a lifestyle, and is not a religious belief

It is not something a person has. It is what a person is.

[Zuiderelle]

9. Polygamy and gay marriage are entirely separate issues.

Polygamy or group marriage can be between gay people or straight people or bi people or a combination of them all. Gay marriage is the same as straight marriage. One person in a contract with one other person. Not to say that poly-relationships don't deserve rights, but the complications of distributing those rights, in the current structure of our federal benefits for married persons, makes it an entirely different problem. Gay marriage simply takes the system that is already in place for straight marriage and allows gay people to have the same exact benefits.

Gay marriage is a step forward for all citizens' rights. The only clear way to accomplish equality for poly-relationships, is to do away with marriage altogether (which would be a perfectly fine solution to me, as long as we individually are allowed to choose who can make decisions for us, and who we can leave our inheritance to, etc.).

[and-justice-for-all]

5. Polygamy is a religious moral to some sects....

and Same-sex marriage can not be related to polygamy.

Marriage is defined by the 2 people involved and no one else.

[pegleg]

6. It could very well be that legalization of polygamy is the logical next step

as a human rights issue if all parties are consenting adults. Just food for thought. Honestly I would have to support it if I support gay marriage. the times they are a changin'

[and-justice-for-all]

7. So you would be open to people having Harems?

It is still a religious practice.

If someone want so have more then one Wife, than a Women should have the same right to have more than one Husband.

Polygamy really does not bother me at all, but just because some one has several wives and off spring, does not mean that they should receive tax credits and public assistance because they have 5 wives and 15 kids.

I support the institution for 2 individuals to marry, why should I then support the dark age practice of polygamy?

[pegleg]

10. The traditional definition of marriage is changing from one man, one woman

to two persons based on the fact that both are consenting adults. Based on that fact, I see no reason why 3 or more consenting adults should not be allowed to marry.