Upstream. A Mohawk Valley Blogzine.

Sunday, July 16, 2006

A Few Questions For Proponents Of Gay Marriage.

I hope to get back to the subject of gay marriage eventually. For now I would just like to ask the proponents of gay marriage a few questions. Once gay marriage becomes legal, as I think it probably will, the current absolutist definition of marriage will be gone. When that happens, the definition of marriage will have the potential of endless expansion, like the universe after the big bang. Bigamists, polygamists and polyandrists are already using the same arguments as gays, in an attempt to legalize their unions. Will the gay community support polygamists in their fight for "equal protection under the law", or will their heterophobia cause them to discriminate against them?

And just how far will the marital universe expand, once gay marriage is made legal? Will a man be able to have five or six male spouses? Will a man eventually be able to marry his niece? Will a PETA-phile be able to marry her horse?

5 Comments:

  • Wow, Dan. Intriguing perspective. So, what you're supposing is that the gay community will be satisfied to stop redefining marriage once they finally accomplish their agenda - and leave the polygamists (et al) to fend for themselves.... I'm not thrilled with the direction the gay lobbying takes the government, and I'll be equally unthrilled with the other maritally-challenged groups fighting for their day.

    By Blogger Roman Hokie, at 2:45 PM  

  • Again, I am not sure why there is so much focus on the word marriage? Gay couples are already protected by law in many states so as to receive insurance benefits etc, from the significant other's workplace. Indeed any competitive company already offers benefits to same sex couples as if they were married, it makes sense to insure the company can compete for the best workforce. So if gays already get the legal rights of marriage, and I think they should, who cares what the union is called?

    As far as your "domino theory" of gay marriage, I’m not a big believer in domino effects. There are no legal rights for multiple partners nor between a person and an animal, in fact those unions are illegal by law. But I wonder, if a woman wants to have six husbands and six guys want that relationship how does that affect me? That question is of no real consequence since as I said that union is illegal.

    It just seems to me that this is an emotional issue that is focusing on a word.

    By Blogger fxrsjoe, at 9:15 AM  

  • My company offer DP (domestic partner) benefits. And many major companies are self-insured. This means that the companies, though administering their health plans through plan providers, pay the bills. Why should the companies reduce their profits for someone's privledge of insurance when they are not legally married?

    And, if we dole out benefits to DP-ships, why not just blow the sanctity of marriage completely out of the water and give benefits to any couple shacking up?!?! AND also give them the opportunity to avoid the 'marriage penalty' on their Federal Income Tax, which affects predominantly DINKs the most. Sheesh.

    By Blogger Roman Hokie, at 12:04 PM  

  • BTW, it's not an emotional issue focusing on a single word, Joe. It's a faith issue focusing on God's law.

    By Blogger Roman Hokie, at 12:05 PM  

  • RH,
    I think companies offer same sex benefits in order to compete for the best people in the market place. I think most human relations managers will tell you that offering same sex benefits increases a corporations net profits because they are able to attract the most qualified people to the positions they have to fill.

    My comment on focusing on a word was not meant to slight your religion or my religion for that matter. (I don't agree with my faith on this issue - my God also said to love all people and treat them with respect). My comment is that same sex relationships are perfectly legal and in fact same sex unions are sanctioned in 8 states as well as much of the free world. For the most part these laws confer most if not all the rights of marriage on a couple. So who cares if it is called a marriage or a union? - they are the same - if you stand against it I would think you would be challenging same sex unions not just joining the fight when someone wants to call a same sex union a marriage.

    Again I think people get emotional when the word marriage is used. How else can you explain the results of a CBS poll? (Law and Civil Rights, PollingReport.com. (Accessed July 5, 2006) )
    The poll notes that 57% of Americans think that same sex couples should be given legal recognition but the number of people who support legal recognition drops to 23% when you call it marriage. Again it seems to be calling it marriage that draws people's ire, not the bestowing of legal rights.

    By Blogger fxrsjoe, at 5:35 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home