Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   First Gay marriage, then Polygamy (its happening!)
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 94 (248229)
10-02-2005 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by nwr
10-02-2005 2:40 PM


quote:
The state is also an implicit partner to the contract....
That's true for all contracts.
But there is a problem that the majority of our laws concerning inheritance, power to make decisions for an incapacitated partner, and child welfare are written with the idea of one male/one female partnership in mind.
Now, it seems like a pretty trivial change to make it apply to a one person/one person partnership; polygamy would require some more drastic rewriting of the laws, although perhaps no more than it has taken to change to one male/one female from one superior male/one inferior female.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by nwr, posted 10-02-2005 2:40 PM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Silent H, posted 10-02-2005 3:34 PM Chiroptera has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 94 (248266)
10-02-2005 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Silent H
10-02-2005 3:34 PM


quote:
Most case law isn't written (as in passed by legislature) anyway, but comes out of decisions.
It sounds as if we are going to let the courts decide these issues in the cases where our written monogamy-base laws don't apply we run the danger of clogging the courts with a lot of litigation.
But then, since we probably would not see too many people suddenly rush into polygamous relationships, this may be an unnecessary concern on my part. Certainly, when a lot of "publishing" and down-loads became popular on the internet, our courts did not collapse under the weight of new copyright issues, so you may be right. (If this is what you are saying.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Silent H, posted 10-02-2005 3:34 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Silent H, posted 10-03-2005 3:53 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 94 (253500)
10-20-2005 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Silent H
10-20-2005 6:48 PM


quote:
Only some limited and specific statements (iirc restricted to the New Testament) can be read to prefer monogamy....
And some of Paul's writings can be interpreted to prefer strict virginity for both sexes (a interpretation taken serious by some sects) over even monogamy.
But polygamy doesn't make the cut, nor does strict chastity, among the modern hip Christian.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Silent H, posted 10-20-2005 6:48 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024