Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Gay people can have multipartner relationships too. [View all]Tatiana La Belle
(152 posts)245. I see.
I also don't understand equal protection very well.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
278 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)
Not every relationship is entitled to equal dignity, for instance the law prevents
snagglepuss
Jul 2015
#12
Comparing the behavior of consenting adults in relationships based on love to child rape is wrong.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#14
So you're really making the argument that marrying more than one person is the moral equivalent of
Kurska
Jul 2015
#18
So, you are being disingenuous, and Kurska hasn't argued for some stupid, mindless..
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#37
The concept of females having self-determination and rights is not a cultural determinant.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#54
The concept of anyone having consent is culturally determined, and has little to do...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#57
You do realize you are being disingenuous, no one is saying that people should be free...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#153
Those studies are examining cultures and religions that are extremely misogynistic and abusive...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#178
How does polyamory become bad if the government extends some marital rights....
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#225
I heard a lot of people pushing that same bullshit line when same sex marriage came up.
Quackers
Jul 2015
#230
The idea that you can only "truly" love one person or that love is some sort of limited resource
Kurska
Jul 2015
#64
Even worse, they are using the exact same arguments against same sex marriage to criticize...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#49
Are you gay? Are you familiar with things like denied hospital visitation and a host of other issues
Kurska
Jul 2015
#9
Would it really be so horrible to you if they had basic things like HOSPITAL VISITATION.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#21
And you should be aware there are a host of other legal rights that come with marriage.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#61
I actually would like to see us able to legally create our families from our friends
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#55
Immediate dissocation or association with individuals based on simple legal work.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#93
Think, what if it is the partner outside of the marriage that is in the hospital.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#122
I say everyone in the US gets married in one giant ceremony to each other
The Straight Story
Jul 2015
#10
You got anything in your bag of tricks besides "You fail" or "You don't make sense."
Kurska
Jul 2015
#33
I would say that reasonable restrictions would be similar to those allowed for two person marriages.
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#44
Exactly, marriage is a contract with certain expectations, indeed, there are some that...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#63
You still haven't said what you consider should be the maximum number of spouses
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#101
I think polygamist marriage wouldn't be so common that it would represent a huge burden.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#106
Except they would have the legal argument that their marriages shouldn't be subject
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#108
But people trying to immigrate here have a reason for possible fraud -- to obtain citizenship.
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#116
A marriage between 3 people maybe, but a marriage of 10,000 people would certainly draw additional
Kurska
Jul 2015
#117
Again, the law would have to define a limit. How would you justify a particular number of marriages
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#118
Why? Some marriages to foreign spouses draw less or more scrutiny based on circumstances.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#120
Because laws have to have a rational basis. There is a rational basis, based on a multitude of
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#123
They could go with Biblical precedent. That would be 701 total spouses max per marriage.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Jul 2015
#130
Why do you say the religious 'cults' are 'bad behavior'? If it is bad, then how would you prevent
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2015
#135
The same way you do for monogamous relationships, domestic abuse and exploitation is not...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#154
"Gay men have the same rights that straight men have, they are free to marry any woman of their
Kurska
Jul 2015
#78
There is a key difference. No one is born polygamous. It actually IS a "lifestyle" choice,
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#81
I think if we are predicating the right to marriage inborn sexuality (which I do not do).
Kurska
Jul 2015
#89
How would that work on a practical basis? Would you set any limit on the number of spouses?
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#94
But note the OP, chatting away with the big fake and carrying on as if they had some big
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2015
#274
I don't want to step over any line here, but Kennedy's decision seems to not be concerned with
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#95
And the polyamorous do have the right to marriage. And to any other additional relationship
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#98
Oh, you mean they have the right to marry one person. I don't think that's what
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#102
Well, Turley actually analyzed the decision in a professional capacity here
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#105
Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer, and Ginsburg disagreed with Roberts's dissent,
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#119
Er, you are posting Constitutional analysis from Utah's Attorney General--posted on fox13now.com?
Romulox
Jul 2015
#128
Seriously? You're seriously arguing that Turley, who's preparing for an important legal case,
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#195
No, I'm arguing that Kennedy's own words would be enough for Turley's argument
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#201
This is correct. Kennedy's opinion sounded in "Dignity", not "Equal Protection".
Romulox
Jul 2015
#127
The Court specifically did not make Lesbians and Gays a Protected Class. That's what a
Romulox
Jul 2015
#139
That's because "due process" was in the Kennedy decision, not protection of gays as a class
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#192
Actually, Turley is very clear that it is due process, and not a protection of gays as a class
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#200
Turley is saying that not relying on civil rights legislation makes the future unclear
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#234
Thank you. It's been very confusing with a number of articles giving opinions.
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#251
Except that Turley has a case and a client that could push the envelope
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#187
If Turley can make an effective argument based on Kennedy's concept of dignity
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#191
So then what is the 'rationale' for telling three consenting adults who love each other
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Jul 2015
#143
If a majority of people wanted to support expanding legal marriage to include polygamous groupings,
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#146
There's just as much harm to women and children in monogamous relationships.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Jul 2015
#149
Modern egalitarian cultures evolved AWAY FROM polygamy, and that helped them become
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#163
I'm abandoning the term polygamy because most of these posters refuse to make distinctions.
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#175
But what about legalizing or recognizing polyamorous relationships? Since polygamy is a loaded term.
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#172
"If a majority of people wanted to support expanding legal marriage to include polygamous groupings"
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#199
The court is not elected and constitutional issues are not decided by ballot measures
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#206
When deciding on a "rational basis" for a law, the Court relies on research provided to it by the parties.
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#209
Research is the key word: academic journals, amicus briefs from interested parties
Tatiana La Belle
Jul 2015
#210
Yes, and the published, peer-reviewed, academic research agrees on the negative effects of polygamy.
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#213
I never argued that popularity was the sole basis for approving laws. It's just one basis.
pnwmom
Jul 2015
#220
the same as any other non-discriminatory legislation--that the recognition and encouragement
geek tragedy
Jul 2015
#148
Do you really not see how you arguements are recyled word for word from gay marriage opponents?
Kurska
Jul 2015
#173
No, I am stating facts. The rightwing talking point is that offered by yourself and Samuel
geek tragedy
Jul 2015
#263
Part of why supporting this is so great is you get to stick it to people like Scalia
Kurska
Jul 2015
#112
I'm shocked, SHOCKED by people who not only auto-trash, but tell everyone they are auto-trashing.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#261
Actually I've been making a several year sustained argument in favor of sexuality liberty.
Kurska
Jul 2015
#165
So I've read the thread and here are my questions and comments to the OP. First, you mention
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2015
#138
Its a reaction to the anti-poly posts, look at geek tragedy as an example of this.
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#155
Yes it does. If shitty people exploit my community as a device to insult another I will stand with
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2015
#160
So you are saying that all the poly members of DU and their allies should just sit back...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#161
Is that what I said? No, it's not. Any poly members of DU should speak for themselves and
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2015
#216
I'm not the one throwing out wild accusations and generalizations here. n/t
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#223
Doesn't matter, you are advocating for legal recognition of poly relationships, that makes you an...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2015
#168