Active Users:508 Time:13/12/2025 10:28:16 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
+1 *NM* HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 23/10/2012 07:36:46 PM
Reply to message
For all you supporters of Gay Marriage: What about polygamy? Narg - 20/10/2012 12:02:06 AM 1542 Views
Legal rights. snoopcester - 20/10/2012 12:14:10 AM 938 Views
It almost sounds like you are saying... Narg - 20/10/2012 12:31:40 AM 921 Views
That is what I'm saying it. snoopcester - 20/10/2012 01:07:50 AM 910 Views
Technically, privileges, not rights. Tom - 20/10/2012 04:16:45 AM 899 Views
Sure A Deathwatch Guard - 20/10/2012 12:35:53 AM 812 Views
All for it... For adults over the age of 18. *NM* globug0822 - 20/10/2012 01:18:04 AM 549 Views
What about it? Ghavrel - 20/10/2012 01:21:17 AM 870 Views
+1 *NM* globug0822 - 20/10/2012 01:51:25 AM 582 Views
+2 *NM* ironclad - 20/10/2012 11:18:39 AM 454 Views
should be legal, would be nice for poly people. should include polygyny and polyandry. *NM* temeraire - 20/10/2012 03:29:05 AM 455 Views
poly people? Yunalesca - 20/10/2012 12:44:01 PM 930 Views
Government needs to stop legislating morality. So yes *NM* Dark Knight - 20/10/2012 03:36:37 AM 441 Views
That's a huge chunk of what government does. Palatine - 20/10/2012 04:35:45 PM 885 Views
That's not what I'm saying Dark Knight - 21/10/2012 03:21:08 AM 888 Views
So you're opposed to abortion and gun control then? Welcome aboard! Cannoli - 21/10/2012 06:14:14 AM 848 Views
Why do you keep talking about gay marriage and polygamy in the same sentence.. Amyrlin - 20/10/2012 03:58:26 AM 907 Views
Get a grip. Your response is just what I tried to avoid. Narg - 20/10/2012 04:33:40 AM 825 Views
The more fool you. Cannoli - 21/10/2012 05:55:30 AM 909 Views
This, and legal recognition of it, is precisely why marriage has become an Equal Protection issue. Joel - 22/10/2012 03:40:01 PM 881 Views
Ha! Point. *NM* globug0822 - 20/10/2012 05:40:34 AM 717 Views
Because they are both violations of the paradigm of genuine marriage. Like it or not. Cannoli - 21/10/2012 05:49:32 AM 805 Views
Marriage is always a choice, whatever the motive(s.) Joel - 22/10/2012 04:00:40 PM 862 Views
I have no problem with polygamy being legal, but marriage is a privilege and can be limited to two. Tom - 20/10/2012 04:16:08 AM 923 Views
The only problem with that is that it was established with a heterosexist assumption Cannoli - 21/10/2012 06:33:32 AM 911 Views
From a legal perspective, all of your arguments are irrelevant Tom - 21/10/2012 03:12:39 PM 1008 Views
How would you argue for putting it in the same category as race? Burr - 21/10/2012 04:28:12 PM 914 Views
I wouldn't put it in exactly the same category. Tom - 21/10/2012 08:43:51 PM 926 Views
This really is blatantly obvious, but still it might bear repeating... Legolas - 21/10/2012 04:43:13 PM 873 Views
That limitation is still prejudicial and somewhat arbitrary. Joel - 22/10/2012 04:25:25 PM 1107 Views
Yes, but only if its equal. Multi-people relationships should be more acceptable by society. Aeryn - 20/10/2012 05:15:24 AM 924 Views
On the other hand, marriage also comes from that place. Ghavrel - 20/10/2012 06:11:01 AM 906 Views
There's a pun to be made from your comment *NM* Larry - 20/10/2012 06:12:53 AM 694 Views
"Polygamy" is the all-inclusive term; whether or not he meant it, he said it. Joel - 22/10/2012 04:31:09 PM 833 Views
I support autogamy in addition to various forms of exogenic relationships Larry - 20/10/2012 05:49:07 AM 844 Views
Have you seen the Glee episode where Sue Sylvester conducts a marriage of herself to herself? *NM* Tim - 20/10/2012 09:50:32 AM 449 Views
I am fine with it if all existing parties to the marriage consent to each addition. Tim - 20/10/2012 10:10:19 AM 962 Views
I got no opinion on it. LordPerrin - 20/10/2012 12:51:43 PM 969 Views
The case for polygamy has really weakened rather than strenghtened, you might say. Legolas - 20/10/2012 03:53:34 PM 1047 Views
The idea of a group marriage makes me uncomfortable kHz1000 - 20/10/2012 04:19:48 PM 821 Views
I have no problem with it, but as Amy says, it's not really relevant. *NM* beetnemesis - 20/10/2012 05:40:50 PM 470 Views
As long as it is equitable imlad - 20/10/2012 05:55:57 PM 832 Views
Legalize polygamy and create a familymaking process, but don't cover polygamy under marriage. Burr - 20/10/2012 10:14:58 PM 852 Views
The state shouldn't even recognize marriage beyond name changes anyway Isaac - 21/10/2012 03:52:40 AM 900 Views
Indeed Cannoli - 21/10/2012 06:04:41 AM 960 Views
I don't give a damn what you call it. That's your business. Burr - 21/10/2012 06:17:40 AM 1242 Views
And so? Cannoli - 21/10/2012 07:05:08 AM 869 Views
Re: And so? Burr - 21/10/2012 04:10:19 PM 1047 Views
So can we call it garriage, give the same legal effect and call it good? *NM* Narg - 22/10/2012 03:28:33 AM 441 Views
That would be fine with me, if that's really what came about. Burr - 22/10/2012 04:35:24 AM 855 Views
According to your argument we could afford gay couples the same legal privileges... Narg - 22/10/2012 03:20:17 AM 802 Views
Yes! We just don't trust you guys to actually do that. Burr - 22/10/2012 04:36:43 AM 908 Views
"...separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Joel - 22/10/2012 04:45:31 PM 864 Views
That may well be the ideal solution. And also the most ironically amusing in how it would fail. Burr - 22/10/2012 07:35:05 PM 832 Views
We already went there and did that in '04, and yes, it was funny as f--k. Joel - 22/10/2012 09:51:49 PM 778 Views
Agreed in principle, but custody/cohabitation/assets go well beyond name change. Joel - 22/10/2012 04:37:09 PM 843 Views
This is the sort of thing that *needs* to be about principle Isaac - 23/10/2012 04:54:10 AM 778 Views
Parental, property and other rights need government protection, and thus government involvement. Joel - 23/10/2012 05:14:37 AM 796 Views
None of which need hinge on marriage Isaac - 23/10/2012 05:54:07 AM 780 Views
In the legal sense of marriage, yeah, they kinda do. Joel - 23/10/2012 07:20:38 AM 820 Views
Legal contracts must be open to all consenting adults, or none. Joel - 22/10/2012 03:11:55 PM 928 Views
You are correct, yet your reasoning is flawed. HyogaRott - 23/10/2012 03:20:25 PM 836 Views
Again, the Equal Protection Clause has far less force on private entities than on government. Joel - 23/10/2012 03:52:06 PM 771 Views
Much less force, yes. Burr - 23/10/2012 04:15:03 PM 765 Views
The crux is "If it's my business, it's my business." Joel - 23/10/2012 04:43:25 PM 864 Views
Re: The crux is "If it's my business, it's my business." Burr - 23/10/2012 07:15:17 PM 777 Views
Like you said: By referring to "all invididuals" (or, better, "persons" or "citizens.") Joel - 24/10/2012 04:14:55 PM 800 Views
But we know very well that it doesn't have dire commercial consequences. Burr - 25/10/2012 07:17:55 PM 860 Views
Depends on where you look, and for how long. Joel - 26/10/2012 01:19:00 AM 875 Views
+1 *NM* HyogaRott - 23/10/2012 07:36:46 PM 390 Views
No the analogy is not exact, nor legally the same... HyogaRott - 23/10/2012 07:33:25 PM 754 Views
Analogy is not equality, only similarity. Joel - 24/10/2012 04:37:29 PM 980 Views
We aren't asking for something better or different. Burr - 23/10/2012 04:27:04 PM 823 Views
yeah, it is very circular. HyogaRott - 23/10/2012 07:44:33 PM 884 Views
I have several friends who practice polyamory, if they wanted to marry I would support it. *NM* Jojjo - 24/10/2012 06:47:58 PM 427 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Formatting
Smiley Codes