Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
snoopcester Send a noteboard - 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM
The former, one of the reasons I raise incest is it is an example of the states being able to bar marriage between people, hence, arguments revolving around the states having no right to ban marriages are logically flawed. Arguments that the state should not possess that power are another matter, but as is, if someone states that no such right exist, they are overlooking precedent.
Ah, sounds like you are disagreeing on opinion then - around what is actually a right, what it intails and what, if anything, overrides it.
I should imagine we'd agree that 'messes' something might introduce into legislation aren't really good reasons to keep a ban on something. 

An interesting point in this is that it isn't exactly a ban, just a limit on how far the rights and benefits of marriage should be spread. You can legally have a relationship with as many partners as you like, you're still just going to get the same as a couple do though and the simplest way to do it is to only allow a marriage between two people, since it doesn't involve rewriting a huge volume of laws. Still though, you can be married in religion to multiple partners (people moving to the UK who are married to multiple partners have to nominate one on moving here to be the one who recieves the benefits and rights)
That applies to polygamy pretty often too. Or, say, someone adopting an adolescent then marrying them when they turn 18, pretty foul but I don't think "grooming" can be a blanket reason, since it wouldn't apply to people of the same age (sibs/cousins) in all likelihood. Also, every state has different laws and qualifiers for incest, some allow first cousins. But yes, of course there's the genetic defect thing, but gay unions can't produce kids, so incest unions who agree not too breed would seem equally legit, and again their is an issue, is incest the only situation where a higher-than-average-probability of genetic defects bars marriage, should it be, should others be for that reason, etc.
It is an old charge against polygamy - not sure it holds true in the same way though (since you can have a polygamous relationship, you just can't marry, so a clear difference there) and I'm not sure if it is actually a true issue now or just an old fear?
Most of your argument in there really is down to the fact there is a big grey area around exactly where the cut off points are... but then that exsts everywhere (different countries have different laws, after all). It is about balancing the rights of the people (those of having a relationship of their choice against their right to protection)
I'm slightly lost on what you are arguing with regards to children - same sex couples shouldn't be allowed to marry because there is no risk of children but rather regardless of it. A male-female relationship carries a risk that they will have children - people can lie, doctors can mess up etc.
*MySmiley*
Robert Graves "There is no money in poetry, but then there is no poetry in money, either."
Henning Mankell "We must defend the open society, because if we start locking our doors, if we let fear decide, the person who committed the act of terror will win"
Robert Graves "There is no money in poetry, but then there is no poetry in money, either."
Henning Mankell "We must defend the open society, because if we start locking our doors, if we let fear decide, the person who committed the act of terror will win"
Let's ban all Christian Marriage.
07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM
- 1634 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me.
07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM
- 1035 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people.
07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM
- 1270 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there!
07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM
- 1086 Views
Who else should make those decisions?
07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM
- 1023 Views
I'd totally...
08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM
- 981 Views
I'd totally...
08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM
- 1141 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering.
08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM
- 1073 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged
08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM
- 983 Views
*Shakes Head*
08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM
- 945 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM*
08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM
- 541 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense.
08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM
- 1044 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense.
08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM
- 1009 Views
Re: *Shakes Head*
08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM
- 993 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution
08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM
- 1092 Views
No, I was referring to same-sex marriage. Real marriage hardly counts as a novelty. *NM*
11/08/2010 02:28:43 PM
- 452 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about.
08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM
- 938 Views
You cannot be that stupid.
11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM
- 1213 Views
There's a lot of ridiculous arguments here, but I'll focus on just one of them...
11/08/2010 03:38:05 PM
- 1092 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM
- 968 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad.
09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM
- 1000 Views
Is that assumption valid?
09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM
- 953 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid?
09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM
- 941 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid?
09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM
- 1055 Views
Not really
09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM
- 915 Views
Re: Not really
09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM
- 1047 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives.
11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM
- 1082 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM
- 987 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM
- 925 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM
- 1034 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM
- 1049 Views
It should be noted again...
09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM
- 1077 Views
and how is it not a right?
09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM
- 951 Views
My definition of rights...
09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM
- 1074 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right.
10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM
- 832 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example
10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM
- 936 Views

You could just as easily move the emphasis...
10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM
- 1064 Views
If we need a more specific resolution...
10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM
- 1246 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM
- 928 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM
- 1252 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize.
10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM
- 887 Views
The point is that marriage IS a right, one which cannot be denied based upon sexual orientation *NM*
10/08/2010 07:04:16 PM
- 717 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM
- 1121 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though.
10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM
- 925 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point.
10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM
- 924 Views
Re: I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point.
10/08/2010 06:33:56 PM
- 857 Views
It's mentioned as a right in some SC decision quoted in that Walker opinion. *NM*
10/08/2010 06:51:13 PM
- 461 Views
To clarify for you
10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM
- 857 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body...
10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM
- 1306 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body'
10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM
- 898 Views
The fact that it is capable of authorizing the use of military force makes it an enforcement body
10/08/2010 10:33:59 PM
- 1170 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless....
10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM
- 881 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM*
11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM
- 497 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right.
10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM
- 1006 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction...
10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM
- 1089 Views
Note it all you want...
10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM
- 799 Views
No, they seek to expand the terms of the partnership. Homosexuals can & do get married normally *NM*
11/08/2010 03:14:25 PM
- 509 Views
The best one yet.
10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM
- 1056 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM
- 924 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM
- 1034 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM
- 925 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM
- 1045 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel
11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM
- 1048 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel
11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM
- 998 Views