In the 20 states where gay marriage bans remain, what's next?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Well, the opening of the door for gay marriage should not lead you to that consideration. Not anymore than allowing gay marriage should force us to consider now whether or not we should put a Starbucks on the moon.

I don't see why not. As several stated above, what two (or more) consenting adults do to each other is their business, no one else's.

[GandD 5,966]

I don't see why not. As several stated above, what two (or more) consenting adults do to each other is their business, no one else's.

Because one is a conversation about a couple being married, and the other is about one persons having multiple partners. You would talk about marriage between one man and one woman, one man and one man, and one woman and one woman in one conversation.

Then in a completely different unrelated conversation you would talk about marriage between one man and multiple women, one woman and multiple men, one man and multiple men, one woman and multiple woman, or any other variation.

The psychology of the desire to spend the rest of your life with one person is completely different with wanting the spend the rest of your like with multiple people, you know?

Its like comparing guns to cars. They're completely different, it doesn't work.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I don't see why not. As several stated above, what two (or more) consenting adults do to each other is their business, no one else's.

Sure it is their business and they can largely do whatever they want - within the limits of the law, of course. There was this case a few years back where two adults consented for one to slaughter and eat the other. They even cooked and shared as a meal a piece of the adult that was to be slaughtered and eaten before he was actually slaughtered. That should be no-one's business?

Look, marriage is not just between these two (or more) people. It's also between them and the various layers of government since marriage does bestow certain rights upon the married and burdens them with certain obligations as well. The "it's no-one's business" argument followed to its logical conclusion will lead you to getting rid of the institution of marriage altogether.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Good point, excellent, in fact. They can be lovely and loving, but give them even a SMIDGEN of a reason to be jealous, and WATCH OUT!!

Noo what ? You are joking right ?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Sure it is their business and they can largely do whatever they want - within the limits of the law, of course. There was this case a few years back where two adults consented for one to slaughter and eat the other. They even cooked and shared as a meal a piece of the adult that was to be slaughtered and eaten before he was actually slaughtered. That should be no-one's business?

Look, marriage is not just between these two (or more) people. It's also between them and the various layers of government since marriage does bestow certain rights upon the married and burdens them with certain obligations as well. The "it's no-one's business" argument followed to its logical conclusion will lead you to getting rid of the institution of marriage altogether.

Now you're comparing marriage to slaughter... talk about going WAY off base!

And since you mentioned it, what's so wrong with removing the "institution" of marriage altogether? I mean, what good does it do for us? Pretty much ANYONE can get married with nothing more than purchasing a license to marry (no testing required in most cases). But to dissolve a marriage, that takes much more, and allows the government (state typically) to get involved and decide who gets what. I see marriage as little more than a religious tradition that has exceeded its usefulness.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

In the 20 states where gay marriage bans remain, what's next?

What's it mean? I thought all weddings were supposed to be happy, festive and gay?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Because one is a conversation about a couple being married, and the other is about one persons having multiple partners. You would talk about marriage between one man and one woman, one man and one man, and one woman and one woman in one conversation.

Then in a completely different unrelated conversation you would talk about marriage between one man and multiple women, one woman and multiple men, one man and multiple men, one woman and multiple woman, or any other variation.

The psychology of the desire to spend the rest of your life with one person is completely different with wanting the spend the rest of your like with multiple people, you know?

Its like comparing guns to cars. They're completely different, it doesn't work.

Is it, really? Pretty sure that everyone who is currently married (to one person at a time) has at least fantasized about a threesome. Some have actually done it, for sure. Doesn't make them all that different from folks who are completely monogamous.

They psychology of either concept has little to do with the legality of the concepts. Other than one group has fought to get it legalized, and the other (if there are all that many who do want polygamy in the US) has yet to do so.

[GandD 5,966]

Is it, really? Pretty sure that everyone who is currently married (to one person at a time) has at least fantasized about a threesome. Some have actually done it, for sure. Doesn't make them all that different from folks who are completely monogamous.

They psychology of either concept has little to do with the legality of the concepts. Other than one group has fought to get it legalized, and the other (if there are all that many who do want polygamy in the US) has yet to do so.

If you fantasize about having sex with other partners, I'd say you're normal. If you actively do it, I'd say marriage might not be for you.

[decocker 7,198]

what? fantasizing about having a threesome is the same thing as being married to multiple partners?

[GandD 5,966]

Good point. Marriage, for the record, is about more than sex.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

If you fantasize about having sex with other partners, I'd say you're normal. If you actively do it, I'd say marriage might not be for you.

So, in your world, what are the rules for marriage? What should happen to those who violate your rules?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Now you're comparing marriage to slaughter... talk about going WAY off base!

Your statement was - and I quote - "what two (or more) consenting adults do to each other is their business, no one else's."

I just wanted to demonstrate that that statement has limits. Did I pick an extreme case to demonstrate that? Yes. But the fact remains that the statement you made is limited to lawful conduct. Another example would be abused spouses. How many of those continue to run back to their abusers? Does that not constitute consent to be abused? Maybe we should not intervene at some point? Maybe we send the cops on the first and second occasion but if the abused runs back a third time, all bets are off. It's no longer our business because we have now determined that there is consent on part of the abused. That's an absurd suggestion, of course, but so is the statement when made in such a general way. That's all I aimed to point out.

And since you mentioned it, what's so wrong with removing the "institution" of marriage altogether? I mean, what good does it do for us? Pretty much ANYONE can get married with nothing more than purchasing a license to marry (no testing required in most cases). But to dissolve a marriage, that takes much more, and allows the government (state typically) to get involved and decide who gets what. I see marriage as little more than a religious tradition that has exceeded its usefulness.

That's a point of view that one can certainly have. I don't share it. I believe that there is a larger value in the commitment that a marriage represents.

[JohnR! 5,495]

And once you have kids, marriage is anything but sex!

Good point. Marriage, for the record, is about more than sex.

Edited October 9, 2014 by JohnR!

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Good point. Marriage, for the record, is about more than sex.

Darn skippy it is! It's more about her having dinner ready and a cold one poured when I get home. Get that part right, and the sex will take care of itself...

[GandD 5,966]

So, in your world, what are the rules for marriage? What should happen to those who violate your rules?

In my world is correct because its my opinion. Rules of my marriage are mutual fidelity albeit sexually, mentally, emotionally, whatever. If you actively cheat on your spouse, why be married to begin with? You clearly don't want to be dedicated to one person, which is whole idea of marriage in the way I understand it.