Rick Santorum's comparison between gay marriage and polygamy has me wondering exactly what the rationale is for it being banned. As long as everyone is of age, free of coercion, and none of the marriages are secret, where's the problem? If one actually takes separation of church and state seriously, then marriage boils down to legal agreements (I personally think that religious marriage should carry no legal weight whatsoever). Framed in that way, it clearly is another case of trying to legislate morality. While it pains me to agree with Mr. Santorum on anything, it does follow that if one accepts gay marriage one must also accept polygamy. Of course, he's hoping I'll have some visceral reaction of intolerance at the association. I reserve that sort of response for politicians of his ilk.
I have friends who are in a plural marriage. Not like the weird LDS /cultish kind but where each of them are equally married to the others. The man has two wives, and each woman has a husband and a wife. I think it's wonderful. There's nothing wrong with a plural marriage provided each person is capable of informed consent to the marriage, no one is coerced, "given" or dare I say brainwashed to believe entering one is god's will or some crap like that.
ReplyDeleteThere are many plural unions like this that are successful. You just don't hear about them. That would destroy our society now, wouldn't it??? smh.
Although polygamy wouldn't be for me, I am hard pressed to come up with an argument as to why it shouldn't be legal for those who want to indulge in it, knowingly and consensually. Unless there are statistics that prove it is an unfit environment for raising children, I'd have to say let people do what they want with their lives.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually more concerned about the opposite problem of comparatively isolated family units being difficult for child rearing. I've been working on a post about the shortcomings of the nuclear family in this non-extended family age.
ReplyDelete