Very good. You get a gold star.<quoted text>Yes I did.
Can still engage in "marital relations", and who knows that might even result in a "family way".Married people with no children.
So much for the "marry according to one's orientation rule".A bisexual can marry a a man or a woman.
Hmmmmm.....lost track of that point,I'll have to go back and reread the transcripts. But I don't think I was stating it would, or implying it would.How does polygamy safeguard against siblings marrying?
True, some of the ruling families, or former ruling families of Europe can attest to that.Half brothers can marry half sisters in many areas as you pointed out with polygamous relationships worldwide. In fact it's even common in non polygamous situations like royal lines.
"Misogyny", sounds like something Bugs Bunny would say. Well if I've giving that impression, let me tell you brother, with a wife and several daughters, who are quite outspoken at times, that is not the case. Anyway, my take is legally, marriage should remain, still be defined as, a union of husband and wife. No "Misogyny" there. Husband and wife, Mother and father, we all have a set of the latter, at the very least biologically speaking.As I've said to before to you and everyone who lined up before spewing the same nonsense; to me marriage has always been the joining with the one you love. The declaration to your family, friends, congregation, God, Church, and the government that you choose this PERSON to be your lawfully wedded SPOUSE, and parent of your children,(had to fix your misogyny there. It's glaringly loud BTW). I've noticed the only time you speak of the women is when they are behaving like brood cattle.
Non husband AND wife? Different relationship situations, different solutions.
"....husband, wife, and the kids, and the life they create...." How is that advocating a complete restructuring of society?Then why are you advocating a complete restructuring of society and marriage laws that completely changes what you just said you value; ONE MOM ONE DAD?
Sure it does. SSM advocates want the opposite sex gender requirement removed so they can marry. Polygamists want the number restriction removed. That's not applying the law equally. As it stands right now ALL men have the same right to marry ONE woman, as do ALL women have the right to marry ONE man. That applies to everyone, at least in the non SSM states.It's been pointed out that your polygamy crusade has nothing to do with applying current laws equally to all Citizens.
SSM also scraps the idea of a man and a woman being head of that family unit. In today's social reality of nuclear families, step families, blended families, grandparent headed families, single moms, single dads, families headed by SSCs, multiple "baby mommas", "baby daddies", is a consensual plural marriage family really that much of a stretch? I don't understand why those who wish a fundamental change in American marital jurisprudence for themselves are unable, or unwilling to acknowledge another fundamental change for others?In fact it advocates scraping the current idea of marriage being the union of two people into one family unit.