#LoveWins for gay couples, but for polygamy activists, the fight continues

Print More
Polyamory

Photo by Robert Ashworth via Flickr

Photo by Robert Ashworth via Flickr

Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content by logging-in here.

As the glitter settles following a weekend of SCOTUS celebrations and Pride marches, group marriage activists fight on. Is polygamy the next slide on our slippery slope to damnation or the next rung on our steep climb towards full civil rights and equality in America?

  • gary

    got the hashtag ready when polygamy wins
    #vivaamore,
    twibbon – multiple hearts entwined
    🙂

  • Jon

    As an Atheist, I see problems with polyamory. First, let’s be clear that the overwhelming majority of cases of polyamory are those of multiple wives (for whatever social or biological reasons). It looks like this (polygyny) is harmful to society in a number of ways. A full discussion is beyond the scope of a comment section, but here are two. Allowing polygyny would result in some rich & powerful men having multiple wives. This would abet corruption, devalue women (making them again property), and lead to greater social injustice and unrest. On a side note the bibles are fully in support of polygyny/polygamy (except for ministers). Of the many examples, perhaps 1Kgs5:15 is most clear – showing unambiguously that polygamy is perfectly fine in the eyes of the Biblical God, as David had 12 wives.

  • Clifton

    Every person born is polygamous by nature. Raise your hand if you married the only person you dated. Staying Monogamous is simply against nature, the next ruling should be for the polyamoruse, why not? If gays and lesbians can marry why can’t the bi’s and other polygamous people marry? There are many scientific studies that prove man is born polygamous and also sometimes bi amoruse.
    Be patient polyamoruse your day is coming when your marriages will be recognized as well.

  • Larry

    How about this, when the polygamists can draft proposed laws pertaining to marriage and marriage rights which fits well with outside a binary default scheme that is fair and equitable to all spouses, then they can have polygamy.

    Until then, it just wreaks havoc on the existing system. It only seems to work in places where rule of law and gender equality under the law is not really there.

    “why wouldn’t the same “imposition of this disability,” serve to disrespect and subordinate people who find fulfillment in polyamorous relationships?””

    Because our system is not designed to handle them. Because such relationships are virtually never equitable for all spouses involved. Because it promotes inbreeding. All things Roberts knew, but dishonestly forgot.

    Gay marriage requires virtually no alteration to existing laws pertaining to marriage. Since said laws are gender neutral by nature, the gender of the spouse is not a material issue with application.

  • John W

    Talking of playing Devil’s advocate, Mr Pellot, you forgot to give us your own view on the subject: are you for or against?

    Perhaps you are waiting to see which side of history this would put you on..

  • Larry

    The problem with polygamists are they are too lazy.

    I am sure if one can get a committee of a few of them, hire some lawyers with a background in legislative drafting, they can cough up a way to fit their marriage types into our system in a fair and equitable manner.

    Until they show some industriousness on that front, there is no reason to take them seriously. Polygamy is too much of a hassle for our current laws concerning marriage rights and default rules to handle.

  • Maunalani

    I am a Christian, and the courts have already told me my beliefs on marriage are irrelevant.

    But if same sex marriage is constitutionally required, I don’t see the difference between that and polygamy. In fact it seems you can make much stronger arguments in terms of stability of society, being historically acceptable, and having benefits. But in any event that is trumped by the Supreme Court’s declaration that people who love each other have a fundamental right to marry.

    So I strongly support the extension of civil marriage to polygamous persons, in order to assure marriage equality.

  • larry

    Your beliefs on marriage have always been irrelevant if you wanted given the color of law and had no justification other than , “God says so”.

    We live in a nation which can never allow purely religious sectarian ideas to be endorsed by government. Tradition is not an argument for banning an action. The Supreme Court didn’t hear rational and secular arguments for gay marriage bans because there weren’t any. Nothing worthy of taking seriously.

    As for polygamy, there are plenty of rational and secular reasons not to have it. Your equating the two just shows you are either ignorant and/or lazy.

  • brkev

    Many people mistake polygamy for group marriage or vice versa.

    Polygamy means more than 1 marriage. If I for example were married to “Alice” and “Donna” for example, I could be said to be polygamous. In that situation however, Alice and Donna would not be married to each other, just to me.

    If however, Alice and Donna and I were all married to each other that would be group marriage.

    Think of it this way, since marriage is a contract. Polygamy would be the equivalent of me having a business contract with Alice and a business contract with Donna. Group marriage involves Alice, Donna and I having a single business contract together.

  • Pingback: Gay marriage * Ramadan deaths * Abortion drone: June’s Religious Freedom Recap - On Freedom()

  • Larry

    Which only works as such if you had the resources of Bill Paxton in Big Love and could keep 2+ separate households and do not co-mingle resources, childcare, or incomes. Otherwise the whole separate contract thing falls apart and you are left with a harem and severely unequal footing for spouses.

    More importantly one needs to draft laws to create fair and equitable default rules for marriage rights in a multiple situation. Our current system is binary in nature with rights and obligations running through a host of various kinds of laws.

  • Voice of Reason

    legalization of polygamy would simply be fulfillment of last days’ prophecy.

    see Isaiah 1:4
    1 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

    honestly, with all the men turning gay, we will need polygamy for the straight women who can’t find a straight man to marry.

  • Pingback: Fragile Foundation of Marriage Equality, Part 4()

  • Pingback: Marijuana ministries * Chicken blood * Chocolate snakes: July’s Religious Freedom Recap - On Freedom()

  • Pingback: Most non-religious Americans condone multiple sexual partners, new survey shows - On Freedom()

  • Pingback: Farewell, On Freedom - On Freedom()