Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(108,978 posts)
Mon Jul 6, 2015, 10:25 PM Jul 2015

Politico's Jonathan Rauch: "No, Polygamy Is NOT the Next Gay Marriage."

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/polygamy-not-next-gay-marriage-119614.html#.VZs4EWC4mgw

I am a gay marriage advocate. So why do I spend so much of my time arguing about polygamy? Opposing the legalization of plural marriage should not be my burden, because gay marriage and polygamy are opposites, not equivalents. By allowing high-status men to hoard wives at the expense of lower-status men, polygamy withdraws the opportunity to marry from people who now have it; same-sex marriage, by contrast, extends the opportunity to marry to people who now lack it. One of these things, as they say on Sesame Street, is not like the other.

Yet this non sequitur just won't go away: "Once we stop limiting marriage to male-plus-female, we'll have to stop limiting it at all! Why only two? Why not three or four? Why not marriage to your brother? Or your dog? Or a toaster?" If there's a bloody shirt to wave in the gay-marriage debate, this is it.

SNIP

In this article, I noted other research suggesting that societies become inherently unstable when effective sex ratios reach something like 120 males to 100 females, such that a sixth of men are surplus commodities in the marriage market. That's not a big number: "The United States as a whole would reach that ratio if, for example, 5 percent of men took two wives, 3 percent took three wives, and 2 percent took four wives—numbers that are quite imaginable, if polygamy were legal for a while."

By abolishing polygamy as a legal form of marriage, western societies took a step without which modern liberal democracy and egalitarian social structures might have been impossible: they democratized the opportunity to marry. It's no coincidence that almost no liberal democracy allows polygamy.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/polygamy-not-next-gay-marriage-119614.html#ixzz3fAVtlHTx
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Politico's Jonathan Rauch: "No, Polygamy Is NOT the Next Gay Marriage." (Original Post) pnwmom Jul 2015 OP
Plural marriage is not the same as same sex marriage Gothmog Jul 2015 #1
And bigamy is a choice, whereas sexual orientation is an immutable characteristic. n/t Betty Karlson Jul 2015 #6
Thanks...amazing that you had to post the obvious, though... joeybee12 Jul 2015 #2
rausch nailed it restorefreedom Jul 2015 #3
Were women in any of these societies allowed to take multiple husbands? nt Mojorabbit Jul 2015 #4
Kick and fucking rec... SidDithers Jul 2015 #5
Who? LittleBlue Jul 2015 #7
It was a toaster oven, dammit! KamaAina Jul 2015 #8
 

joeybee12

(56,177 posts)
2. Thanks...amazing that you had to post the obvious, though...
Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:49 AM
Jul 2015

Lots of paid disruptors deliberately trying to offend here these days...knr

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Politico's Jonathan Rauch...