Polygamy recognized in Canada

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Change the definition of the word, as Rouge said, it happens every day. "Gay" used to mean "happy". Now it doesn't. Things change.

I don't see how the 'traditional definition' has anything to do with what they want to call it. "Marriage" is in the public domain, and cannot be denied to individuals based on their (ugh) 'traditions'. Marriage is a public good, now.

Golf was 'traditionally' men-only. Does that mean women have to go find their own golf courses to play at... and can they call it golf? Or will they have to call it civil-hard-wiffleball? (they do, after all, start at different tees...)

Is marriage a right??

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Is marriage a right??

Yep.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Yep.

Ok, if it is a right then how do you limit how many people one can marry and what age people can marry at? If it is a right, then you can't.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Ok, if it is a right then how do you limit how many people one can marry and what age people can marry at? If it is a right, then you can't.

Its up to society (the law, legislature) to figure out what limits on number and age of individuals to qualify them for marriage.

As long as the 'rules' equally apply to everyone, I don't much care what limit the government/law chooses. They seem to be headed in the right direction right now as far as I'm concerned... and yet I don't see the outcry over underage marriage being the next 'big issue'.

Is it? I assume you're a 'slippery sloper', so that means that once gay/polygymous marriage is allowed, obviously child porn is the next to follow? I just don't see that happening. But, then, I'm not 'afraid' of society's 'moral slide', I think we're being more progressive and humanistic than ever before. And its great!

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Is it? I assume you're a 'slippery sloper', so that means that once gay/polygymous marriage is allowed, obviously child porn is the next to follow? I just don't see that happening. But, then, I'm not 'afraid' of society's 'moral slide', I think we're being more progressive and humanistic than ever before. And its great!

Really? Because I was positive people were saying there is no way that polygamy would ever be recognized in Canada, after gay marriage was legalized.

What I think the problem is? The gay community is approaching this with the argument, "what is wrong with gay marriage."

That could be used to legalize a lot of things.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Really? Because I was positive people were saying there is no way that polygamy would ever be recognized in Canada, after gay marriage was legalized.

What I think the problem is? The gay community is approaching this with the argument, "what is wrong with gay marriage."

That could be used to legalize a lot of things.

So? Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone. Neither does polygamy as long as it doesn't involed childern, abuse, etc. I think that might be a very good justification for a lot things.

EDIT: Maybe the more appropriate question is "Who does this hurt and why?"

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by White Doors

I disagree 100%. There is a train of thought in our 'PC' dominated culture that you have to be the SAME to be equal. That's crap. They ARE different and that's ok. Celebrate our differences I say. If you just pretend that there are no differences then you are wasting a great learning opportunity to get to know different people.

Celebrate our differences by denying them a right many badly want? Wow, what a great celebration!

I'm guessing you would have found a society where they simply fixed up blacks-only washrooms, keeping them segregated from whites, to be rip-roaring fun. What a great way to get to know them, pointing out how they're different from whites and so keeping them separate!

Denying homosexuals access to marriage doesn't "celebrate their differences", it sends the message that they're not worthy of marriage, which, as I said, just helps perpetuate negative stereotypes and opinions.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Celebrate our differences by denying them a right many badly want? Wow, what a great celebration!

I'm guessing you would have found a society where they simply fixed up blacks-only washrooms, keeping them segregated from whites, to be rip-roaring fun. What a great way to get to know them, pointing out how they're different from whites and so keeping them separate!

Denying homosexuals access to marriage doesn't "celebrate their differences", it sends the message that they're not worthy of marriage, which, as I said, just helps perpetuate negative stereotypes and opinions.

I think you have to realize what most of us have learned when dealing with White Doors.

[RougeUnderoos]

I see the Republicans down south have brought this issue back up. George will apparently be making a statement on the matter. I read somewhere that they'll be debating this constitutional amendment re: definition of marriage for quite a while but everyone already knows it won't pass.

They must really take marriage seriously down there because I swear I heard about some other matters that need their attention. I guess this issue is a little more urgent.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Really? Because I was positive people were saying there is no way that polygamy would ever be recognized in Canada, after gay marriage was legalized.

Well... those 'people' apparently didn't consider the similarities between the issues. I certainly wasn't one of them, talk to them.

What I think the problem is? The gay community is approaching this with the argument, "what is wrong with gay marriage."

That could be used to legalize a lot of things.

Well... what IS wrong with gay marriage? I can tell you whats wrong with underaged sex and child pornography (and will, if you need me to). I can't tell you whats 'wrong' with gay marriage. Enlighten me.

[Azure]

Well... those 'people' apparently didn't consider the similarities between the issues. I certainly wasn't one of them, talk to them.

I didn't say you were one of them. Just pointing out that some people saw this coming, and were right.

Well... what IS wrong with gay marriage? I can tell you whats wrong with underaged sex and child pornography (and will, if you need me to). I can't tell you whats 'wrong' with gay marriage. Enlighten me.

What may be wrong to you, isn't necessarily wrong to me. Like I have pointed out earlier in this thread, this is no universal definiton for right and wrong. Therefore that argument shouldn't be used, especially if you want to be tolerant of others morals.

Use "equal rights" and no one in their right mind should disagree with legalizing same-sex marriage. Unless they don't believe in democracy.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

So? Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone. Neither does polygamy as long as it doesn't involed childern, abuse, etc. I think that might be a very good justification for a lot things.

EDIT: Maybe the more appropriate question is "Who does this hurt and why?"

So whats wrong with a son marrying his dad? Why is that illegal?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

So whats wrong with a son marrying his dad? Why is that illegal?

If one part is underage then you can see plenty reasons why that's wrong. And obviously there has to be questions about mental stability, etc. I suppose if both parties are psychologically fit and at an age of correct consent then it's up to them.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

So whats wrong with a son marrying his dad? Why is that illegal?

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, children from incest can suffer from deformities. The comparison was made to similar reasoning behind not letting pregnant women drink.

As for male/male son/dad... I suppose if they're truly up for it (and the son is over the age of majority), have at 'er. Best of luck to them. I certainly won't be marrying my son, and hopefully he won't marry his... but thats what's good for me and mine, might not be good for you and yours.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

If one part is underage then you can see plenty reasons why that's wrong. And obviously there has to be questions about mental stability, etc. I suppose if both parties are psychologically fit and at an age of correct consent then it's up to them.

I never said he was underage. You're grasping for answers here. To "you" it might be wrong, to someone else its right.

If there is nothing wrong with it, why isn't it legal?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, children from incest can suffer from deformities. The comparison was made to similar reasoning behind not letting pregnant women drink.

As for male/male son/dad... I suppose if they're truly up for it (and the son is over the age of majority), have at 'er. Best of luck to them. I certainly won't be marrying my son, and hopefully he won't marry his... but thats what's good for me and mine, might not be good for you and yours.

I realize that. But "why" isn't it legal? Because its wrong?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Azure

I realize that. But "why" isn't it legal? Because its wrong?

You tell us Azure, do you think it is wrong? Do you think it shouldn't be legal?

I can give you all the reasons for the Incest Taboo in many societies, but that isn't really what you are looking for. You are asking a Rhetorical question.

I'll side with Aga here, as long as the child/parent are over the age of consent I don't believe there is anything wrong with the two of them being married.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

You tell us Azure, do you think it is wrong? Do you think it shouldn't be legal?

I can give you all the reasons for the Incest Taboo in many societies, but that isn't really what you are looking for. You are asking a Rhetorical question.

I'll side with Aga here, as long as the child/parent are over the age of consent I don't believe there is anything wrong with the two of them being married.

Age, of consent means jack ****. A parent still has a power over their child and is in a authority position. Just because the parent agrees and the child says "ya I agree" doesnt make it right.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Age, of consent means jack ****. A parent still has a power over their child and is in a authority position. Just because the parent agrees and the child says "ya I agree" doesnt make it right.

And how is that different than say an abusive husband having power over a wife?

Both circumstances would be considered illegal.

Exact same circumstances, but you aren't outlawing Heterosexual marriages because of it.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

And how is that different than say an abusive husband having power over a wife?

Both circumstances would be considered illegal.

Exact same circumstances, but you aren't outlawing Heterosexual marriages because of it.

Not every marriage produces a violent relationship, every daughter/father marriage produces a power difference/authority inbalance.

Again I am glad you arent making the rules for the country. Your borderline sicko.