Papa bull
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 6,927
- Reaction score
- 2,599
- Location
- Midwest
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
In order for this ruling to apply to polygamy, it has to be close to same sex marriage. You admit it isn't. So your previous assertion is wrong.
Then procreation has nothing to do with government recognition of marriage. Legally you cannot claim that a law is for a specific purpose, such as procreation, yet the function of that law in no way requires that condition to exist. In fact, some other couples who cannot procreate are allowed to legally marry. And in certain cases, only those who cannot procreate are allowed to marry. This proves that procreation is not legally tied to marriage at all and is not a valid argument for restrictions in marriage, unless the restriction was specifically saying that only those couples who can procreate can legally marry. This is not likely to get approved. Very few people would support such intrusion into a couple's life.
Which means the state definitions are valid so long as they do not violate the US Constitution.
Marriage is a legal contract that makes two people legally recognized as "spouse" to each other.
If the nature of a decision on marriage is one that states marriage as a right that any person in love with another should not be prohibited by the state from marrying, then you have, in fact, opened the door to polygamous marriage. If you're in love, you should be able to marry. That's the argument of the homosexual marriage advocates. That puts plural marriage on equal footing and the fact that it's three people who love each other rather than two shouldn't matter. If you change the definition of marriage to "people who love each other", polygamy is in. If you change it to "any two people" from "one man and one woman", you establish that the definition of marriage must be changed to accommodate people that have deviant love relationships, then polygamy is in.
If homosexual marriage is mandated by equal rights, polygamy is the next logical step and there's no decision that would force gay marriage that wouldn't also force polygamy. Only by letting states legislate their own marriage laws can we keep things reasonable. Eventually homosexuals will be able to marry in all 50 states, but it will take state legislatures to make it legitimate and to preclude even more perverse changes to the definition of marriage.