Polygamy...

I don't know if its because I can't stand being condescended too by Mark Steyn whenever he writes a column about "Gay Marriage", or if its something else, but I'm really starting to re-evaluate my views on Gay Marriage.

I don't think society will collapse if gays "marry" (and indeed it hasn't since they were first granted the 'right' to do so), but I'm conflicted on the whole polygamy issue. Will society collapse if polygamy becomes legal? Probably not. Will people rush out and marry numerous partners it polygamy is permitted? Probably not either. And its the same thing with "Gay Marriage", I can't imagine how the lifestyles of gays change at all depending on whether they're "married" or not.

Personally, I'm beginning to have a problem with government intervention with marriage at any level. If gay marriage becomes legal, many have argued that polygamy is essentially legal as well (or will be shortly), I didn't buy the argument at first, but numerous people, have logically presented that argument since the Supreme Court ruled on the marriage decision last month. It wouldn't really bother me if polygamous relationships were formed by consenting adults, but it does bother me if the government is perceived to be sanctioning or 'accepting' those relationships. I like to think that I'm strongly against 'legislating' morality and discriminating on that basis, or even being perceived to be acting in such a manner, so in order to get rid of that problem all together, the government would have to stop recognizing all forms of marriage and instead let marriage be an exclusively religious issue. The idea of civil unions seems to be becoming more and more appealing... where the government would simply grant partnership rights to any group of two people.

So let me try to re-phrase that: Legislating morality is bad when it comes to discriminating against gays on the marriage issue, but I think that its also bad when the government is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be endorsing non-traditional relationships by calling them "marriage". Civil unions that grant partnership rights seems to be a perfect compromise... marriage would be thrown back to religious institutions, the government would be kept out of the business of defining marriage at all (thus eliminating their ability to be perceived to be sanctioning or endorsing polygamy or anything else), and I think that the government would then have an easier job when it comes to restricting legal partnerships to two people... as a matter of public policy.