I'm shutting down Google+ for the night and quite possibly for the weekend. Why? This stupid #gifwars thing people are so proud of. This Adam Black guy said he doesn't like gifs and now everyone is mass trolling him. Having been mass trolled like this I can relate to him easily enough. Have an opinion and the collective might of Google+'s lower class denizens jump on a bandwagon. I just saw a post where someone wanted to jump on board and had to get clarification she was tagging the proper Adam Black. She wasn't even connected to him ! Nor was she a part of the original discussion. She just wanted to follow the herd. When I called her out of it she claimed, "one gif doesn't make a troll." Perhaps not, but she's contributing to a larger troll effort. One straw doesn't break the camel's back, but thousands will. So, tonight, Google+ disgusts me. It probably will tomorrow as well. And possibly Sunday. I gave up Google+ for two months this spring
Comments
Again, I ask, where do I sign??!
#dearsantaiwouldlikeautah
Whether or not you're personally a fan of polygamy, the living and sexual arrangements of consenting adults is not your business. If you've got a problem with child brides, then discuss the age of consent in your state. If you've got a problem with manipulative relationships, I'm afraid there's no sensible way to make that illegal without infringing on the rights of innocent people. Rape is still a crime, even between legally married or cohabiting people, so there's always that.
I really don't think you're getting the bigger picture here.
In some ways you're both right. Both anti-polygamy laws and anti-homosexuality laws are attempting to legislate the private doings between consenting adults. Arguing that the fighting for gay rights is completely different from the fight for polygamist rights seems to me an attempt to distance the gay community from polygamists... an impulse I can understand.
Still, logically both conflicts are dealing with the same two issues: First, to what degree can the government prosecute people simply for their private consensual sexual behavior. Second, to what degree should the government legally recognize and give special status to a certain type of relationship.
This verdict was equivalent to the overturning of anti-sodomy laws: it's not the gov'ts business who you want to have sex with or cohabitate with as long as it's consensual (age of consent issues notwithstanding). If polygamists want to fight for legal recognition of their relationships and benefits, that's a different story.
I think what Gord is arguing is that people are born gay or straight or bi or what have you. They are not born polygamists. I don't think I agree with you. Some people are born inherently wanting to be in relationships with many people at once... in fact I'd argue an awfully large number of people have at least considered this idea in their teenage or young adult years. Most people think better of it, but many more get legally sanctioned marriages, then proceed to cheat on their spouse.
So long story short, the two debates are similar, but that doesn't imply a slippery slope between them. It's a short step from allowing straight relationships to allowing gay ones. Genitalia aside, they're identical. Legally recognizing polygamy is a huge logical leap, and would require us to finally come up with a unified answer to the question "Why does the state even care about marriage?".