I don't make a lot of personal posts so please bear with me. #Rufus hasn't been doing well for the past week or so. I mean, he's 13 (at least), and has slowed down due to age, but the past week or two he's been acting like every movement is a Herculean effort. A few times in the past couple of weeks his rear legs have given out on him completely to where I've had to pick him up and carry him which is, in itself, telling. Rufus has always hated being carried and struggled continuously when I did so. Yesterday while petting him I noticed two golf-ball sized things up under his chin. Now, they may be benign lipomas as Rufus is covered with them (one one each thigh, one on each shoulder, one on his chest and a few smaller bumps here and there) or they may be indicative of something else. I'm no vet and aside from emergency medic battlefield training I have no medical experience whatsoever, but these new things seem to be where your or mine lymph nodes are located....
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?".