Subject:
|
Re: Gay Marriage
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:01:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2739 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
|
| |
| |
Whoa there, bigot:-) What about all of the polygamists out there? And how
about all of those incestuous lovers? Are you prepared to “normalize” those
relationships as well? And if not, on what basis?
|
I think the legal line has to be drawn somewhere.
|
Does it? Why must marriage be a special case of contract?
| |
Take health care for
example. You’re allowed to provide health care for your spouse, which is
great if they wouldn’t otherwise get it. But as soon as you start getting
into polygamy, you have to wonder where the line gets drawn. Provide health
care for your 80 wives & husbands? That’s rather unfair to the insurance
company, and people could take unnecessary advantage of such a lack of
restriction.
|
I think that if polygamy became popular the insurance companies would have ways
of covering their budgets worked out way before it mattered.
It is frankly startling to me that you’re using this bit of false pragmatism to
justify essentially arbitrary restrictions on the way in which people associate.
For what good cause?
| |
I suppose I might be able to be convinced that the limit should
be *raised*, but not eliminated. I’m pretty comfortable with the idea of a
single spouse.
|
Which limit? Do you mean that two wives is OK, but not fifteen? I’m really
not getting that.
| |
| |
Sisters marrying sisters; fathers marrying daughters and sons; recognizing
those types of relationships really shouldn’t matter?
|
Y’know, I’ve thought about that one, and really I don’t see the problem. I
think it’s always been the implication that there shouldn’t be inbreeding,
and I agree that inbreeding gives unfair disadvantage to children born of
such a relationship. But really that’s talking about procreation, not
marriage. I think there should be laws against procreating (not necessarily
*sex*, but procreation-- not sure how to enforce that one!) within close
relation. But marriage? I guess if you really want to, I say go for it. And
again, before they could enter into such a union, they’d have to be mutually
consenting adults.
|
I grew up in a family that bred animals for fun and profit. I have personally
managed the breeding of show cats, rats and fish. Backbreeding, the process of
securing desirable traits by breeding offspring to parent is very, very common.
Too much of it over too long a period can isolate/concentrate unpleasant genetic
traits -- if they were there anyway. And hybrid vigor is very real -- I have
rejected the cat fancy specifically because I think immoral breeding is strongly
encouraged by the rules. But the effects a few generations of incestuous
breeding are simply trivial. The stereotypical Kentuky holler’ inhabited by an
extended family inter-breeding for a dozen generations would be bad (for them),
but that’s a pretty extreme and rare case.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| (...) As I noted to Frank, if the system is set up to handle polygamy in a balanced way, then I'm all for it. My goal isn't to restrict marriage in any way, but more to prevent people from abusing it as a legal loophole. (...) Again, the only reason (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| (...) Don't you? I mean, the way US laws are written, I believe there are rights provided to married couples that wouldn't be to anyone under something like 'civil unions'. Speaking of which, is that what you're advocating? If so, how would a 'civil (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
