The future of marriage

Of course you are. How else would you even know if a couple was gay or straight? I have no specific problem with Ned's proposal.However, allow me to remind you that we already have "full" marriage for same-sex couples in Canada. Ned's proposal seems to be a step backwards.It's a bit like abolishing the concept of "slavery" so we can adopt a system of "partial slavery" - say only ugly black people can be enslaved.We already have an institution called "marriage". Neither our Constitution nor yours permits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. So what's the problem?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Along about here someone is bound to ask: Hey, what a group marriage? Why can't a guy be married to several women at once? Or vise versa? Yes, it is against tradition, but so was gay "marriage," too, before we all moved forward. So what if it is against tradition? Why can't we evolve to the next step and let all the lovers join together in marriage, no matter what sex they are or how many they might be.”Hoot

THIS, for all my detractors to see, is what the NYTimes article was geared towards. The argument Omni just made is exactly the motivation for the article.Have I not been saying this from the beginning, only to be flamed? So why is it that I'm flamed for saying the exact same thing you have said?

---

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

Good question, Hoot. What would be wrong with group marriage?

---

But government...is not simply the way we express ourselves collectively but also often the only way we preserve our freedom from private power and its incursions. -- Bill Moyers (quoting John Schwarz)

1) Don't see why not.2) It has fuck-all to do with gay marriage, but I can see why you'd want to change the subject to something else. You really suck at arguing against gay marriage.Do you think you'll have an easier time arguing against polygamy?

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

I don't know. What's the difference? It equality, isn't? I hope you are not so bigoted as to oppose it.”Hoot

quote:

---

Do you think you'll have an easier time arguing against polygamy?

---

What do you want to bet that the reasons he gives against polygamy aren't applicable to two-person gay marriage? (Well, except for the standard argument, "I don't understand it, so it must be bad" argument.)

---

But government...is not simply the way we express ourselves collectively but also often the only way we preserve our freedom from private power and its incursions. -- Bill Moyers (quoting John Schwarz)

Come to think of it, Chiro, there really is nothing wrong with it, other than it is offensive to tradition.”Hoot

quote:

---

...there really is nothing wrong with it, other than it is offensive to tradition.

---

Which is the same thing as saying that there is nothing wrong with it at all.

---

But government...is not simply the way we express ourselves collectively but also often the only way we preserve our freedom from private power and its incursions. -- Bill Moyers (quoting John Schwarz)

Marriage is a legal contract that names a person who gets dibs on all your stuff if you die, as well as unvetoable power of attorney if you are incapacitated. An arrangement like polygamy would require specific contracts tailored to each individual marriage. Gay marriage would not. It's a separate issue that requires separate legal reasoning.If you have a way to adapt that act so it suits multiple people, I'm all for it. But in the meantime, it has fuck-all to do with gay marriage.Honestly, do you even know anything about the institution you're so desperate to defend from the queers? I hope you learn to read, Ralph. See my previous post, after the number 1.How about gay marriage? Come up with a legal way to prevent it yet? Or do you still want to dodge that pesky amendment that keeps giving you so much trouble?Edited by Dan Carroll, : grammar

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

Hey, here’s an interesting experiment. Go out in the woods and count all the animals who are practicing their equivalent of gay marriage. Then go out and count all the animals who are practicing their equivalent of polygamy. I’ll predict that the animals practicing polygamy far, far outnumber those who are practicing gay marriage. What does this mean? Well, maybe polygamy ought to be ahead of gay marriage on our society priority list? Equality delayed is equality denied!”Hoot Mon

Go out and count all the people who are in favor of legalized gay marriage. The count all the people who are in favor of legalized polygamy. I bet that lots more people are in favor of gay marriage than for polygamy. Just a guess, though. That is a more reasonable way to determine social priorities I think.

---

But government...is not simply the way we express ourselves collectively but also often the only way we preserve our freedom from private power and its incursions. -- Bill Moyers (quoting John Schwarz)

So that would be a "no, I don't have any legal way to prevent gay marriage, that's why I'm trying to change the subject", then.Well, I think it's a good plan. Let's head out into the woods... but instead, let's count the number of animals who eat their own shit. It'll be a valuable lesson on whether or not we should model our society on the animal kingdom.While you mull that over, feel free to tell us your plan for circumventing the fourteenth amendment.Any time.Seriously.

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

What the fuck are you talking about? Don't you ever read the Bible? There's nothing more traditional or godly than polygamous marriage.

Doesn't say a darn thing about gays or gay marriage. We've been all over this.