[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Legal and widely practiced? Or just little known of and made illegal as soon as people became aware it was happening?[/quote]
Google. Look into it for learning on various subjects.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]americaninsweden wrote:
The difference is that one out of every 10 people (give or take) is not a polygamist…
[/quote]
Neither is one out of every 10 homosexual either.[/quote]
Few people are currently polygamist because there is a strong social stigma attached to it.
How many would become polygamist if this stigma vanished tomorrow ?
if polygamy was considered perfectly normal ?
if polygamists had the right to scream “DISCRIMINATION !!!” and “BIGOTRY” when someone say a word against it ?
When we say “polygamy” people think about Somethingistan, Arabia or Utah.
They simply forget that there is a B in LGBT.
Bisexual people need at least two people to fulfill their sexual identity and orientation. So they have a self-evident interest in polygamous marriage.
Coincidentally their lobbies are exactly the same who are curently pushing for gay marriage.
Saying that it is their next step is not a slippery slope fallacy.
It’s strategically obvious.
As the “boyfriend” of a bisexual girl, i’m 98% positive that my occasionnal “menage a trois” will be recognized by the State before the end of my lifetime. Sooner rather than later.
I do not want that. But that’s another story.
[/quote]
Polygamy has been more socially acceptable than historically yet its not the first one to seriously challenge traditional marriage. The slippery slope for polygamy begins with traditional marriage, not gay marriage. If you allow someone to have 1 partner of the opposite sex, why not 2? Polygomy even supports the same child raising stability that traditional marriage offers (which is the only half valid point I’ve heard anyone make) yet its not the first one we are considering making legal, there must be a reason for that…[/quote]
Polygamy has already been legal in the past. It’s been “challenging” traditional marriage for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It has/is been an acceptable practice on every continent even North America.
Polygamists have been doing this “challenging” for far longer than gays have.
Also, where did this “right” of marriage come from? Where in the US or states’ constitution(s) is this “right” enumerated?
The fact of the matter is the states have been free to define marriage however they’ve seen fit since 1776 (and before that as colonies).[/quote]
I never said it was a right and have no problem with states defining it.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I wasn’t talking to you Push, but the evangelical slippery slope concerns of the extreme you represent with your "but what about X, X, X.
[/quote]
XYY has been around a long, long time. IT has the historical precedent, not XX or YY.
I’d put money on it. Tell me why it can’t or won’t happen.
You’ve got to know that breaks my heart.
[/quote]
Couple things:
We WILL find out if you’re right. How do I know we will find out? Because society is moving forward on this. YOUR side lost this battle. It might not end that soon, but it WILL end. That is a motherfucking given. You guys aren’t touching the fact that so many conservatives are even ready to move past this. The issue is decided. It isn’t over, but we know WHERE it is headed. That might really piss you off (I’m sure if I hated gays too it would piss me off), but the writing is on the wall. It might not be now, it might not be 5 years from now, but it’s full steam ahead coming.
The thing is Push I live in small county Kansas. I KNOW people who hate minorities. I KNOW people who think women shouldn’t have a place in career society. Racists will ALWAYS exist. People who want women in their place will ALWAYS exist. And people who hate gays will ALWAYS exist. The rest of us moved past segregation. We moved past women in the workplace and political positions. And we moved past gay marriage, or we will. So you’ll always have people who think like you don’t worry. It’s just the majority of everyone else won’t think like that and we’ll kind of move on with giving them rights.
Just like we had end of the world predictors with segregation, we went ahead anyways. Just like we had end of the world predictors with women’s rights, we went ahead anyways. So we’re going to get the chance to see if you’re correct on all your slippery slope horseshit. Because gay marriage is only a matter of when at this point.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
It’s strange how none of the die hard righties in here want to touch just how much the rest of them are starting to be against them on this stance.
[/quote]
A “die hard righty” doesn’t really care about being a sheep. On your next custom t-shirt make sure you put “Baaaaa baaaaa.”
So I take it you hold the stance you do to avoid the fear of scorn from your fellow sheep. OK.
[/quote]
No, I hold the stance I do because it makes sense. Maybe like most conservatives you’ll change when someone close to you comes out of the closet. It’s pretty easy to hate when it’s not anyone you know. Magically those who think like you seem to change their tune when a loved one is gay. Or they are one of the people who scream loudest against gay marriage trying to cover up the fact they are gay. (see preachers, politicians) Sure you don’t have something to tell us Push?
But I guess they are just being sheep when they decide to continue to love that person right? If they had any principles they’d cast that person out of the family and treat them with contempt like the piece of shit they are right?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Legal and widely practiced? Or just little known of and made illegal as soon as people became aware it was happening?[/quote]
Google. Look into it for learning on various subjects.[/quote]
I’m still not clear on what principle polygamy was outlawed on that will suddenly become invalid if gay marriage becomes legal. What you guys are saying about polygamy seems quite different than the history of homosexuality yet when it helps your argument they are suddenly one in the same.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
I’m still not clear on what principle polygamy was outlawed on that will suddenly become invalid if gay marriage becomes legal. What you guys are saying about polygamy seems quite different than the history of homosexuality yet when it helps your argument they are suddenly one in the same.[/quote]
The US and states outlawed it as bad for public policy.
Polygamy wouldn’t suddenly become “valid” - but with a ruling that states may not withhold the “right” of marriage from someone based on their classification applies just as easily to someone whose preference is to have more than one spouse, or as Kamui notes, bisexuals who by their nature shouldn’t be “forced” to commit to marriage to one person when that person in fact loves someone else just as much.
Right now, a state has a right to privilege one form of marriage over all others. If and when the court says “uh, no, state, you don’t, you have treat this other one as equal”, it opens the door to all other alternative arrangements that likewise must be treated as “equal”.
The bisexual argument is just as bad as saying men are naturally attracted to multiple females therefore they shouldn’t be forced to commit to just one.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
The bisexual argument is just as bad as saying men are naturally attracted to multiple females therefore they shouldn’t be forced to commit to just one. [/quote]
So, all in a sudden, forcing people to do something is OK ?
Why ?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
My stance has nothing to do with hate, pal. Not a thing.
If I had a loved one who was gay I would still continue loving them. But they still would have no “right” to legally marry someone of their own sex nor would I support it.[/quote]
This says otherwise:
It’s ok. It’s hard for people to be intellectually honest with the way they feel. Most of the people who are not “against” gays they are just trying to protect traditional marriage right? Because they know how taboo it is to be out in the open admitting they can’t stand something, but really…they just can’t stand something. Which I can understand to an extent. See I’d NEVER have sex with a guy. I just don’t give a shit if you would. Nor can I figure out why anyone really would. I don’t stay up at night wondering what other people are doing in the bedroom. We have straight people into S&M, married and fucking their neighbors, sticking it in their wife’s ass, using some sex toys I would never use. And you know what? I don’t give a shit.
What’s weird though is my facebook page. FILLED with red equals signs. Even from many people quick enough to post the biggest anti-Obama stuff ever. The opposition to this just isn’t there any more. It’s not unified. It’s not in the majority. And those who even recently used to be vehemently against this? Agreeing it’s time to move on.
[quote]
I wasn’t talking to you Push, but the evangelical slippery slope concerns of the extreme you represent with your “but what about X, X, X. It WILL happen if gays can marry, of that be certain!” Significant polygamy issues in states where gay marriage is allowed? Really now? [/quote]
Currently, gay marriage is not allowed in every US states. So we will have to wait a few years before moving toward the next step.
Right now, asking for the recognition of bisexual, swingers and polyamourous rights would be ill advised. It would undermine the gay marriage cause.
As i already said, that’s called “strategy”.
Now, in the not-so-distant Europe :
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/301
[quote]kamui wrote:
Yeah. Crafty fucking queers. Plotting all sorts of shit. Stop them while we can! Surely you’re a good Christian boy who’s only had sex (and it BETTER have been missionary) a few times to make a baby right and you’ve never done something like masturbated. Burn in hell for that shit 
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
Yeah. Crafty fucking queers. Plotting all sorts of shit. Stop them while we can! Surely you’re a good Christian boy who’s only had sex (and it BETTER have been missionary) a few times to make a baby right and you’ve never done something like masturbated. Burn in hell for that shit [/quote]
lol
I fearfully bow down at the feet of your allmigthy psychological discernment.
Glad I could entertain.
What’s even more odd perhaps is to watch the “oh no, polygamy definitely going to be a happening talk, worst thing EVAH” from so many people who just got done voting for a Mormon.
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
The bisexual argument is just as bad as saying men are naturally attracted to multiple females therefore they shouldn’t be forced to commit to just one. [/quote]
So, all in a sudden, forcing people to do something is OK ?
Why ?[/quote]
The word forced was used in what I replied to. Whatever the word the same principle applies.