- Joined
- Jan 24, 2013
- Messages
- 8,834
- Reaction score
- 2,812
- Location
- Alabama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
No, for the same reason that if one chooses to support interracial marriage it is not logical to include gay marriage in the same discussion.
I've never actually seen a clean set of arguments for and against it.
Yes. It was legal for centuries. There is no good reason it should not be legal now.
Then, I apologize for jumping in to question your post relating to extreme Mormons. We appear to agree that once the can of worms is opened, everything should be on the table...
I want to make it clear that I am not supportive of polygamy to make some sort of point about SSM. I support both because I think consenting adults SHOULD be able to make their own choices regarding personal matters such as marriage and things like that.
A Mormon who reads his book really sternly and uses strong starch on his shirt.What is an extremist Mormon?
You're gona have to go to the Loft if you're looking for a clean logical argument about anything.Since the topic of legalized polygamy has always been hopelessly muddled with the topic of gay marriage, I've never actually seen a clean set of arguments for and against it. To be honest I'd be very happy if this were to be such a thread.
A Mormon who reads his book really sternly and uses strong starch on his shirt.
And as a libertarian yourself, how could one make a PRO libertarian argument against it?
Marriage is a societal norm. The marriage license is simply that -- a government license. And licenses are always arbitrary and by their nature can always be redefined. Everything is fair game with a license--the license itself is what opens a can of worms, not gay marriage in particular.When you begin redefining societal norms, everything becomes fair game. As a Libertarian, why would you think not?
And I support neither but recognize that those determinations are beyond my control. I only bring the issue up when the subject is totally dismissed in the discussion...
Marriage is a societal norm. The marriage license is simply that -- a government license. And licenses are always arbitrary and by their nature can always be redefined. Everything is fair game with a license--the license itself is what opens a can of worms, not gay marriage in particular.
I just don't understand why someone would NOT support an adult's decision when it comes to personal matters such as who he or she marries. You said it's not due to religious beliefs, so why?
Because the State has seen fit to sanction the act and bestow benefits. If it were simply between individual adults, they can do what they want, and I don't really care...
Not everyone qualifies.Aren't YOU married and getting those same benefits? Why do you want to deny them to others?
How many Indian reservations do you have in your state?That is absolutely untrue, or at least in my neck of the woods. A few years back, there was an incident in Rhode Island (a neighboring state to me), where a tribal smoke shop was raided and shut down by the RI State Police Department. They arrested several people, and now the tribe is no longer allowed to sell cigarettes without collecting taxes for the state. I am QUITE sure that if child molestation was occurring, the police would also perform a raid where you live. They do not live by their own laws. They are allowed to prosecute and similar things according to their own tribal customs, but they are NOT allowed to break federal and/or state laws.
Aren't YOU married and getting those same benefits? Why do you want to deny them to others?
Then you don't agree. The church key (or can opener, as is commonly used) is the license itself, not gay marriage in particular.I agree, but SSM is being used as the church key (you need to be old enough understand) to do so...
Then you don't agree. The church key (or can opener, as is commonly used) is the license itself, not gay marriage in particular.
Legalizing same sex marriage provides same-sex couples access to the license--of course. I am not following what you are trying to say.If SSM did not provide access to the license, why do you think anyone would care?
How many Indian reservations do you have in your state?
Legalizing same sex marriage provides same-sex couples access to the license--of course. I am not following what you are trying to say.
Yes, I'm married, but not necessarily for the benefits. Our taxes are higher, SS benefits will be limited by the maximum available to married couples, etc..., and any other benefit the government could provide for its sanctimonious sanction, I could obtain through other legal means...
So you still got married. Why did you get married then? You could have just shacked up.
And if someone loves or cares for more than one person and wants to have a married life together with those other consenting adults, I don't see what your issue would be.
Are you saying that you are against government recognized marriages?
Yes, I am against the State bestowing benefits (or penalties) for personal activities in which it has no compelling interest...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?