Bcspace polygamy red herring and fear mongering

[_3sheets2thewind]

Bcspace created a thread wherein we must fear ssm because it paves the way for polygamy....unfortunately for bcspace, an moronic thread on MDDB was created sometime ago suggesting the same fear, quickly though the creator of the moronic thread essentially had to recant his fear mongering...

So remember when everyone was arguing over Proposition 8 and everyone was saying.... This is a slippery slop... and the next thing we know people will be suing and trying to reinstitute Polygamy?

Well the slop has slipped..

http://www.dailygrai...uing-Utah-State

All I can say is we tried to tell ya so.

While I have no personal desire to practice polygamy in this life. I can't thnk of a good reason why that option isn't available, other than it is illegal.

I agree with TSS. As i understand it, polygamists aren't trying to make the government recognize polygamous marriages, they're just trying to make it so they can live a polygamous lifestyle without threat of being arrrested.

I don't see any good reason NOT to do that, just like i would never want gay people to be arrested for living with a same sex partner and calling it a marriage. I don't think the law should regulate what two or more people want to call their relationship and that's exactly what it's trying to regulate with anti-polygamy laws.

I think its funny that if a man has a mistress the law is powerless to do anything criminal but if a man has a "spiritual wife" he suddenly becomes a criminal.

(Bluebell) Amen... I beleive the Authoritarian nature of the US government and the persecution and witch hunts they perpotrated against my Ancestors, are being exposed for what they were. Anti-Constitutional.

(Saints Alive) When we have to involve a third party in our most intimate relationships to arbitrate. We have problems.

[_3sheets2thewind]

so bcspace, do we really have to be scared in our britches that ssm will legalize polygamy, OR should we fear that otherwise upstanding LDS already support polygamy?

do you have anyother strawmen, red herring, fear mongering you would like to demonstrate your ignorance with?

[_bcspace]

Bcspace created a thread wherein we must fear ssm because it paves the way for polygamy

No, that was merely one of the several interesting issues brought up in the article. It's interesting because the instant I bring up something intelligent someone said about plural marriage there is all this hate and paranoia......probably because some of you know that the state actually has no real reason to recognize gay marriage; that it's not even a civil rights issues but a welfare one.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Bcspace created a thread wherein we must fear ssm because it paves the way for polygamy

No, that was merely one of the several interesting issues brought up in the article. It's interesting because the instant I bring up something intelligent someone said about plural marriage there is all this hate and paranoia......probably because some of you know that the state actually has no real reason to recognize gay marriage; that it's not even a civil rights issues but a welfare one.

Good hell, you are full of it, you asserted that we need fear ssm because polygamy was the next in, or in the words of zakuska slippery slope.

Yet, your fear mongering fails, because according to those who represented the will of people in the prop 8 trial, polygamy is within the traditional definition of marriages. In effect, by definition prop 8 legalized polygamy and made ssm illegal.

You made nothing close to an intelligent post, you demonstrated your ignorance that polygamy has the support of the traditional marriage crowd.

[_hobo1512]

I didn't see any SSA in that whacko offshoot LDS group that got busted a few years ago.

They were BIG into polygamy weren't they?

[_bcspace]

Good hell,

Hell is good?

you are full of it

Last I checked my contents, it was all me.

you asserted that we need fear ssm because polygamy was the next in, or in the words of zakuska slippery slope

Not in that thread nor perhaps any other. I certainly agree, though, with the notion that allowing state recognition of gay marriage leads to state recognition of plural marriage.

[_Chap]

I don't suppose that this thread is the one that finally sees bcspace finding the courage to give his view on whether the affidavits sworn by plural wives of Joseph Smith to the effect that they had sex with Smith, and submitted to the court by the CoJCoLDS during the Temple Lot Case, should be taken as evidence that Smith did indeed have sex with his plural wives.

No? I thought not. Bit of a coward that bcspace guy, it seems.

[_moksha]

What's this about polygamy red herring?

Thou shalt not have any Cod before me.

[_Themis]

Bcspace created a thread wherein we must fear ssm because it paves the way for polygamy....unfortunately for bcspace, an moronic thread on MDDB was created sometime ago suggesting the same fear, quickly though the creator of the moronic thread essentially had to recant his fear mongering...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/11/23/bc-polygamy-ruling-supreme-court.html

Apparently not in Canada which has SSM.

[_hobo1512]

I say allow SSM.

It's not like gays and lesbians can screw up marriage any worse than "straight" people already have.