Hi All,
Yes, another homosexual thread...I know, this dead horse has been beaten too many times already. Well, just ignore this thread if you're sick of it...
Anyway, here's my question: aside from all religious arguments, what is the possible justification for making homosexual marriages recognized by law but barring incesteous and/or polygamous marriages from the same recognition?
No, I am not making homosexuality the moral equivalent of incest or polygamy (or polyandry). But I would like the rationale behind saying "yes" to homosexual marriage but "no" to incestuous and/or polygamous marriages, using legal, not moral, arguments.
Keep in mind, I am only talking about marriages between adults, involving no minors, and involving no coercion. Furthermore, the arguments about birth defects and incest seem pointless unless we're going to resurrect the whole spector of eugenic laws.
Please feel free to share your thoughts...and though I know this is a highly emotional issue for most, let's try to avoid flames.
Peace
Yes, another homosexual thread...I know, this dead horse has been beaten too many times already. Well, just ignore this thread if you're sick of it...
Anyway, here's my question: aside from all religious arguments, what is the possible justification for making homosexual marriages recognized by law but barring incesteous and/or polygamous marriages from the same recognition?
No, I am not making homosexuality the moral equivalent of incest or polygamy (or polyandry). But I would like the rationale behind saying "yes" to homosexual marriage but "no" to incestuous and/or polygamous marriages, using legal, not moral, arguments.
Keep in mind, I am only talking about marriages between adults, involving no minors, and involving no coercion. Furthermore, the arguments about birth defects and incest seem pointless unless we're going to resurrect the whole spector of eugenic laws.
Please feel free to share your thoughts...and though I know this is a highly emotional issue for most, let's try to avoid flames.
Peace