I can never tell where you stand on this issue (actually I can) because out of one side of your mouth you talk as though polygamy is inevitable. And then it's "Katie, bar the door!"<quoted text>
Is it that difficult to see the handwriting on the wall?
Actually it was raised, by a Justice, in a question.
True, first step is decriminalization. We both know the recent ruling can only help plural marriage practitioners.
Or several states have jettisoned marriage conjugality. "Marriage equality" sounds so Orwellian. Besides it can be applied to polygamy too.
Oh so it's okay to "harm" children of plural marriages? For the state to deny their biological mother AND father the right to marry? Both mom and dad are present, as opposed to their biological mother or father, and their biological mother or father's same sex partner.
But then on the other hand, you talk about how banning polygamy represents inequality.
So which is it? Are you for polygamy or against it?
I still stand by my comment that this decision in no way helps polygamy.
These decisions were based on the fact that 1.) Those in favor of Prop. 8 didn't have standing. 2.) In those states where marriage is legal for same-gender partners, DOMA--which banned federal benefits and protections--was unconstitutional.
Until polygamy is legalized in a state, they're not going to be able to fight for federal benefits.
And since polygamy has already been addressed by the Supreme Court, I don't know if it will have a chance or not.
That's "their" fight.
If you want to say that it's unfair to seek marriage equality for same-gender couples but not polygamists, then that's your right.
Not being a polygamist, I'm not going to enter the fray.