Polygamy - Time for it to be legalized?

[Spirit]

If you would have told me that Montana would end up being ground zero for polygamist rights, I would have ... well ... I would have made more popcorn.  

 

But hey!  Good for them!  They've been together 15 years!  Why shouldn't they be extended the same rights, legitimacy and dignity that every other American enjoys?

 

 

http://www.9news.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/07/02/montana-polygamous-marriage-license-supreme-court/29612673/

 

[Jason]

Having one wife is a pain in the butt. I say give him what he wants

[Spirit]

Having one wife is a pain in the butt. I say give him what he wants

 

 

 

Hell yeah!  'Merica! 

[Adam]

Hopefully they get what they want

[arch stanton]

Aren't we sick of fighting these losing battles? Leave them alone.

[Spirit]

My favorite argument against this is:  "You don't choose to be gay.  You choose to be a polygamist."

 

Yeah.  You know what else you choose?  Whether or not to be married in the first place.  

 

Be pro choice! 

[InsideThePark]

He's going to have to marry a third wife if he wants to get into the Celestial Kingdom.

[Crampknees]

Damn, where did he find those hotties....at the petting zoo?

[Spirit]

He's not exactly Brad Pitt.  

[mtangelsfan]

We Montanans are a progressive bunch.  

[mtangelsfan]

I'm sure that once the polygamists win their rights Obama's favorable rating will take another jump.

[Angelsjunky]

I'm a bit disappointed with this thread - I thought it was going to be the first in a series involving going up against mtangelsfan on various topics.

[juansavage1]

I don't think this this will happen. To explain, we first have to know why there was a push for gay "marriage" in the first place. 

 

The first reason is to officially sanction homosexual behavior, making it equal to conjugal sex. The second reason is to open a front in the culture war. 

 

If you look at Obama lighting up the White House (FU, half of country) and cartoons using Iwo Jima imagery to promote the rainbow flag, this is seen by many as a cultural conquest.

 

The evidence that this wasn't about marriage per se is that none of the leaders, cultural or political, who support this change ever did anything to support marriage before this. Second, in countries with gay "marriage," homosexuals hardly ever marry (few marry in those countries, but homosexuals much less). Those that do, divorce more. I used to tell people the only good reasons for marriage are children and religion. Gay marriage people have neither. 

 

"They have love." 

 

You can love without marrying. 

 

"Benefits"

 

They were offered benefits. 

 

Now, who are the people who want polygamy? Mainly fringe religious people. Or, uncool people. In other words, nobody will fight for them because they don't represent the next step in the culture war. 

 

The next step is the elimination of gender. 

 

Remember, the Marxist theory is that where they choose, there's no difference and, therefore, any disparity is unjust. At the end, everybody will be equal. 

 

You laugh at me, but the people who make up most of your minds have been talking about this for years. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by Juan Savage

[NrM]

We used to call the chicks in Montana, "Montuffalo".

 

Just say'n

[Crampknees]

Juan, do you have any CliffsNotes for your posts I can get?

[juansavage1]

Juan, do you have any CliffsNotes for your posts I can get?

Yes. 

 

The battle for gay marriage isn't about #lovewins. Those are tactics to rope in the rubes. It's about changing culture. Keeping that in mind, what cultural purpose would legalizing polygamy serve to the people who pushed for gay marriage? None. It won't piss off conservatives more than they're already pissed and it won't normalize a kind of sex that they prefer. 

 

So, I don't think the left will push polygamy. They will push for the elimination of sex in humans, in the biological sense. I can see eliminating sex from birth certificates, for example. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by Juan Savage

[Spirit]

The issue isn't whether or not anyone will fight for them. The issue is whether or not it should be legal. And, of course it should. This is 'Merica. Freedom!

[AngelsLongBall]

"It'd take a million dollars for two chicks to double up on a guy like me"

[juansavage1]

The issue isn't whether or not anyone will fight for them. The issue is whether or not it should be legal. And, of course it should. This is 'Merica. Freedom!

If this happens it will make conservatives look prescient so I don't think the Hollywood/left wing/anti-religious elements that pushed gay marriage will push this. Unless, it becomes something hip and conservatives oppose it, in which case it will become a big deal and people who oppose it will be haters, again.

[Spirit]

Conservatives "look prescient" so rarely, maybe they'll fund it.

Edited July 3, 2015 by Geoff

[Crampknees]

Lib Obama prefers prophetic.  Isn't that how a Messiah should be?

[juansavage1]

Conservatives "look prescient" so rarely, maybe they'll fund it.

I disagree. Every prediction conservatives make on social issues comes true. Pick one and I'll tell you what was said at the time and what happened.

I don't want embarrass anybody,so think of the state of the family,male-female relations in general, the culture and arts, and factors like honesty and cheating.

If you showed people in 1950a Nicki Minaj video or a picture of the white house rainbow,or told them that most kids don't live with their parents rf the number of abortions or divorces or welfare dependency, would people have supported the cultural warriors of the day?

Edited July 3, 2015 by Juan Savage

[TobiasFunke]

Damn Elvis and his sexual revolution!!!

[halobob]

"It'd take a million dollars for two chicks to double up on a guy like me"

Pure gold!

[juansavage1]

Damn Elvis and his sexual revolution!!!

First, we're not arguing the aesthetic or social merits of Rock. I like Rock and probably rock harder than you and any two of your friends.

 

So, let's look at what conservatives said at the time about Rock and what effect it ended up having on young people.