Should all marriages between consenting adults be legal?

Question

I am not revealing my stance pro or con on any of these specifics. Please people, can we have a discussion on this without calling each other names? Thank you so much.

The argument for g*y marriage is that 2 consenting adults who love each other should be able to be married without government interference.

Okay. Should someone be allowed to marry their grandmother, if both are adults and consent? How about brother & sister? How about brother & brother? How about father & daughter?

What about polygamy? Why limit it to 2 people? We shouldn't impose our values on those people, right? As long as there are all adults and consent to it, shouldn't you be allowed to have multiple wives or husbands or both?

What would be wrong with 2 men and 2 women all agreeing to marry each other as long as they are all adults and consent to the arrangement?

There may be other marriage possibilities that I haven't thought of. Basicly, should it be "anything goes" between consenting adults?

Answer 1

Most of your examples involve incest, which is such a strong innate human taboo that it will never fly.

In our society, you can have s*x with whomever you like after a certain age.

If you want marriage, there is an implied value to society to be sure your union is suitable for raising children. So far, we don't really know of any workable marriage in a free open society beside two committed adults.

Proponents of alternate marriage are going to have to gather a lot of evidence that their alternatives are useful to our society. So far, there just isn't any.

There is a conflict between individual rights and community rights in most of our traditions. The dangers to children as so well shown in Texas, make marriage a community value too useful to give up.

Answer 2

Marriage should be between a Man and and Woman.  There are moral issues that are voliated when some of your examples are  used.

Answer 3

It is more than just the rights of "consenting adults" is is social impact. The social impact of a man/woman -man/man - woman/woman are far different that incest. Incest is a violation of societal rules as well as moral and health codes. Polygamy is a concern because of the financial and religious implications - if polygamy were legal it should be under the same state/federal law to prevent child endangerment (the main issue now) many people have "informal" polygamous relationships and that is fine as long as they are responsible adults and don't injure or put children at risk. This is controversial to say the least but needs to be reasoned out and since it is so emotional a topic reason goes out the window.

Answer 4

I believe g*y marrieage is a state matter and the federal government should respect the decisions of each state.

Answer 5

I believe that since marriage is a institution that has united woman and man since the dawn of mankind, it should not be construed to include same-s*x couples.  I just think that the idea of heterosexual tradition has been ingrained into the institution of marriage and to include same-s*x marriage devalues marriage as a whole.

Now I am not an homophobe, I know many g*y people and get along with them, I don't mind them cohabiting and raising kids and getting the same benefits as straight couples.  That being said, I believe that homosexual couples can and should join together in union, but in an type of union that does not interfere with the institution of marriage.

In essence, create a special union for same-s*x couples, that has equal weight to straight ceremonies.

As for polygamy, I think that the concern on part of society on this issue is the ability of a husband to support his wives and his children.  The other issue is a legal quagmire where divorce, custody, alimony become very tricky when there are three or more parties involved (e.g., is each wife entitled to receive custody of her co-wife's children? where do you start with inheritance?).  If the guy doesn't write a will, the government will be forced to step in and decide on this case, which is very tricky because any decision they make will become precedent.