Gay Marriage and Polygamy are not the Same Thing, Rick Santorum

Link to Rick Santorum's Comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGzsHURVE7Q

Twitter: http://twitter.com/ConConsCorner
Tumblr: http://conconscorner.tumblr.com
Email: ConConsCorner@gmail.com

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• conconscorner

[LNSmithee]

You never addressed the issue of why marriage needs to be limited to two people. Would you care to address it now?

[NATESOR]

@Davidoutt No, he's not. You're just a hypocrite. Polygamy is ok. Have the balls to put aside your own bigotry. That's exactly what Rick lacks, and that's why he is against gay marriage. You are like him.

[Knightmessenger]

You know how I'd respond, I'd say yes polygamy should be able to be legally recognized. It might be more complicated if there's a divorce but if consenting adults wish to make a union of more than 2, they should not be prevented from doing so.

[patrickwright1]

@prom6767 I never argued that a 'marriage gene' existed. When the state establishes laws, it doesn't have to meet every whim or recognise every personal choice. It does though have to ensure equal opportunity before the law irrespective of sexuality, sex or race. Does the state have a right to discriminate against mixed race marriage because that is a choice, a different living arrangement? If the law recognises mixed race marriages, does that mean polygamist marriage should also be recognised?

[patrickwright1]

Heterosexuals can get married under existing marriage laws- no discrimination exists. The law is not obliged to recognise all forms of marriage, including polygamy. However, if the state establishes a definition of marriage, it can't exclude people who have a different sexuality but equivalent relationship, as this discriminates based on something they can't change. Gay people are asking for the same choice as heterosexuals- to have their equivalent relationships recognised on the same terms.

[prom6767]

@prom6767 In other words, Patrick, there is no “marriage gene”. Nobody is born with an innate desire to get a government-approved marriage certificate, which means that your argument has fallen apart once again.

You can only maintain your argument by applying a double-standard (ie -polygamy is simply a "living arrangement", while gay marriage is not.)

[prom6767]

@patrickwright1 You say “polygamists are not born as polygamists” Well, of course, nobody is born a polygamist, just as nobody is born “gay married”.

You say "being born a heterosexual does not make one inclined towards polygamy". If that’s the case, then obviously, being born gay doesn’t make one inclined towards monogamy. Similarly, if being born a heterosexual does not give someone the right to polygamous marriage, then, being born gay would not give someone the right to same-sex marriage.

[patrickwright1]

@prom6767 Heterosexuals are born as heterosexuals, but polygamists are not born as polygamists. Being born a heterosexual does not naturally make one inclined towards, nor have a right to polygamous marriage. Discrimination against a particular living arrangement, which is a choice, is not the equivalent of discrimination against the way a person is born. Because legal polygamy does not exist, polygamy laws obviously cannot exclude anyone based on the way they were born.

[prom6767]

@patrickwright1

Polygamists are heterosexual, aren't they? Aren't heterosexuals ALSO born that way? Therefore, the anti-polygamy law discriminates against heterosexuals because of the way they were born. I fail to see the difference between discrimination against homosexuals and discrimination against heterosexuals.

[patrickwright1]

Laws that exclude gay people from marriage not only deny an equal choice, they fundamentally discriminate against the way a person is born, unlike anti- polygamy laws which only discriminate against a choice of living arrangement, not the way a person is born.

Polygamists choose to marry more than one person- gay people do not have the choice of what gender they are attracted to. Marriage should have nothing more to do with sexuality than it does with race.

[prom6767]

@patrickwright1 You say "Anti-polygamy laws discriminate against a particular choice" But the current laws discriminate against the "choice" to marry someone of the same sex. So why would the "particular choice" of gay people to marry someone of the same sex be more sacred or sacrosanct than the "particular choice" of a heterosexual to marry more than one person? That is the question you have failed to answer.

[patrickwright1]

@prom6767 All forms of marriage are living arrangements- however, excluding polygamists from marriage does not discriminate against the way they were born. Both homophobic marriage laws and anti-miscegenation laws discriminate on the basis of sexuality and race, but anti-polygamy laws discriminate against a particular choice. Whatever your view on polygamy, society has a responsibility to end discrimination but not necessarily recognise and legitimise certain living arrangement choices.