Same-Sex 'Marriage' Would Lead to a Push for Polygamy

Only the traditional union of a man and a woman truly serves society

Reader Comments
Back to argument

"Opposite-sex relationships are the only type capable of producing children "..................they are not the only type of couple capable providing a loving nurturing environment for raising children equal to that of heterosexuals. gay couples have opened their homes to abandoned and rejected children of heterosexual unions.

about your scientific facts:narth is not recognized as a credible scientific organization.

about polygamy: each issue will stand or fall based on its own merits.

feetxxxl of FL 9:33AM October 08, 2011

These slippery-slope arguments sure are getting tiresome. Using Peter Sprigg's logic, you could just as easily say that if you allow a man to marry ONE woman, you have to allow him to marry as many women as he wants.

It's a red herring, Peter Sprigg knows this, and it is just an indication of how hysterical and desperate the anti-Gay side has become. Polygamy has no more connection to Gay marriage than it does to Straight marriage.

The only real difference between a Gay couple and a Straight couple is the gender of the two people who have made the commitment to one another. Marriage equality has nothing to do with parenting, since couples do not need to marry to have children, nor is the ability or even desire to have children a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license. It has nothing to do with religion, since people don't need to subscribe to a particular faith to get married, and churches will still be able to deny wedding ceremonies to whomever they wish.

Fact is, there is simply no Constitutional justification for denying law-abiding, taxpaying Gay couples the same legal benefits that Straight couples have always taken for granted.

Chuck Anziulewicz of WV 8:43AM October 08, 2011

Here we go. The Family Research Council is a gang of bigots who propagate the lie that homosexuality is merely a behavior or a choice rather than an immutable characteristic, and thereby misunderstand the entire gay marriage issue.

For slippery slopers, gays are the gateway drug - let them marry and all bets are off. We'll all be marrying our sisters, pets and toasters before you know it. It's a hysterical position born of ignorance and a carefully cultivate fear of the 'other'.

And where there's fear there's hate. Peter Sprigg denies the truth of what homosexuality is because deep down he wants to eliminate it. He doesn't recognize the humanity of gay people in the same way that many Americans, in recent history, did not see the humanity of black people. He is the worst that America has to offer - a picture of hateful, backwardness and medievalism.

The slippery slope I'm worried about is not the fictitious slide from gay marriage to polygamy, but the slide from brazen bigotry against gays to brazen bigotry against other minorities.

www.secretsandwives.com

Sanjiv Bhattacharya of CA 3:07AM October 08, 2011

"The research leaves no doubt that children raised by their own biological mother and father, who are committed to one another in a lifelong marriage, are happier, healthier, and more prosperous than children in any other living situation."

This is misleading to the point of being false. He doesn't cite his sources, but the studies he refers to compares married, biological parents to others (such as single parents, remarried parents, unmarried parents) but NOT same-sex couples. In fact, the studies looking at same-sex parents that compare them to married opposite-sex parents shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as, if not better than, the children of married opposite-sex parents.

Also, the double-speak about kids doing better if their parents are married goes to show that children of same-sex parents would do better if their parents are or could be married!

Alan E. of CA 5:56PM October 07, 2011

This man belongs to a hate group, the Family Research Council. FRC earned the hate group designation from the Southern Poverty Law Center for repeatedly spreading false and degrading information about lgbt from discredited sources, falsehoods that they know for a fact were refuted by reputable organizations such as the Amer. Psych. Assoc., and yet continue to use, and for spreading vile lies about lgbt individuals.

benji of NY 4:06PM October 07, 2011

It would be impossible for the government to mandate or require proof of fertility for married couples. Thus, the vast majority of U.S. courts have ruled that such an impossibility does not mean that marriage is not about responsible procreation; it is. The government does not involve itself in areas that are of no public concern. So, to try to say that marriage is not about procreation is to make the case for the government surrendering all regulatory authority of it.

And Mr. Spriggs is right about polygamy. See a 2006 document called "Beyond Same Sex Marriage" where hundreds of pro-same-sex marriage lawyers, professors, etc., endorsed legal recognition of polygamy. Why should three consenting adults be denied the right to marry a person they love?

Ashley of MD 3:49PM October 07, 2011

My 1989 marriage license makes absolutely no reference to any "purpose" whatsoever, much less that of human reproduction. This is a non issue. No state requires proof of fertility or desire to have children as a requirement for a marriage license. Indeed, many people who buy a marriage license don't what any children, don't want any more children, or can't conceive children. Conversely, many unmarried people choose to have children.

Furthermore, FRC's credibility is extremely questionable since in the Intelligence Report, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the FRC as a hate group,[27][28] saying that the organization "pushed false accusations linking gay men to pedophilia." While purportedly spreading family values, they incite hate by spreading lies. Hate is NOT a family valueor.

Bellevue Michael of WA 12:03PM October 07, 2011

Dinosaurs went extinct because they could not attend to the changes around them. Or are your philosophies in denial of fosil evidence as well as sociological evidence that point to the inherent wrongness of your verse? Open your eyes or suffer extinction.

anom 11:42AM October 07, 2011

<1 2 3