|
Ted Olson: Prohibiting Polygamy Not Like Prohibiting Same-Sex Marriage
[CNSNEWS] One of President Barack Obama's They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them... Supreme Court appointees was the one to ask a pointed question of Ted Olson, the attorney arguing in favor of overturning Proposition 8, the Caliphornia, an impregnable bastion of the Democratic Party, law that reserves marriage for the union between one man and one woman. "Mr. Olson, the bottom line that you're being asked -- and -- and it is one that I'm interested in the answer: If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?" Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked. "Meaning, what state restrictions with respect to the number of people, with respect to -- that could get married -- the incest laws, the mother and child, assuming that they are the age -- I can -- I can accept that the state has probably an overbearing interest on -- on protecting a child until they're of age to marry, but what's left?" she asked. "Well, you've said -- you've said in the cases decided by this court that the polygamy issue, multiple marriages raises questions about exploitation, abuse, patriarchy, issues with respect to taxes, inheritance, child custody, it is an entirely different thing," Olson said. "And if you -- if a state prohibits polygamy, it's prohibiting conduct. "If it prohibits gay and lesbian citizens from getting married, it is prohibiting their exercise of a right based upon their status," Olson said. We seem to be placed in the unusual position as a culture of marriage dying on the vine for heterosexual couples, while attempting to flourish for same-sex couples. I've nothing against same sex couples, as long as the activity doesn't become mandatory, but marriage is a different thing entirely. About the only thing I can think of in its favor is the issue of health insurance coverage. There are lots of factors against it, the biggest being that children need both male and female role models as they grow. A father teaches a boy to be a man, and accustoms a girl to dealing with men. A mother does the opposite, teaching the boy to deal with women and the girl how to be one. It's my feeling (but wo the hell listens to me?) that the health insurance problem could be addressed as a matter of corporate policy, or even by legislation. It wouldn't even take 2700 pages. Marriage is being replaced by what used to be called "common law" marriages, to whit, moving in together and setting up housekeeping. Somehow the health insurance issue is dealt with without benefit of clergy, children are born and raised, mortgages taken out, property inherited, and all the rest. So we're left with something you might call "lack of marriage in name only." I read somewhere recently that the majority of American children are born out of wedlock. Meanwhile, perhaps as much to society's detriment as same sex marriage, since "common law" marriage isn't blessed by clergy or registered with the state, there aren't any bounds on its configuration. Want to be a polygamist? Shack up with two women instead of one, three if you can afford it, or even four. You don't even have to put them in burkas. Ladies, want to give polyandry a try? You can share a house with two or three gents, and with government kept out of the bedroom there's no limit on your activities. You could even combine the two, with multiple male partners, multiple females, even multiple sexual preferences if that floats your boat. It'd make determining the parentage of any children resulting from the activity a bit difficult, but DNA testing is safe, affordable, and not even very rare. That's if you care who the father or mother is. The advantage of all the approaches to 1:many relationships (a little DBA humor there) is that it makes things easier and more stable financially. Get tired of Tom and tell him to hit the road? That's okay. Dick and Harry are still working and bringing home the bacon. So are Darlene and Sheila, so the checkbook barely bobbles unless that bastard Tom cleaned it out when he left. And the whole thing leaves open even more variations. Incest? That one's a little more complicated socially, but with birth control the dangers of inbreeding are gone. Maybe you could even adopt a few kids and raise them fairly normally, something you couldn't do fifty years ago. Just don't mention that Mom and Dad have always had the same last name. Think of an ancient taboo and it can be violated at will this year. Except for your dog. They'll still put you in jail for sleeping with your German shepherd. Or with your chicken. Posted by: Fred 2013-03-28 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=365005 |