If you're for gay marriage, you are also for polygamy, as you have no moral, ethical or legal "excuse" for only TWO people being married if three want to be married together.

Just so you know what you support by default.

um.. sure thing there, hater

I came here to say something nice about this video and the message it conveys, and then I find Quantummushroom's hateful, bigoted comment. Mood changed completely. It's like taking a walk in a beautiful garden on a summer day, only to trod in a nasty steaming stinky turd.

That's what your role in life is QM, smearing shit on nice things. You exist only to make the world a worse place in which to live.

I know that I'm feeding a troll here, that I'm validating its existence, but have to say something. It has to be made clear to people like this that their behaviour and comments are not okay. Not one bit.

You misunderstand my point, as well an intent. I don't 'hate' gays and will go so far as to say it appears there is biological evidence for homosexuality (aka born this way).

I'm not even against gay marriage per se.

What I am saying is here is the side effect 'you' will create by supporting legalized gay marriage, and that is that 'you' then have no grounds for keeping polygamy illegal. You are "hating" and discriminating against polygamists and others supporting 'plural marriage', including, ironically, gay polygamists.

I've brought this up before and some sifters had the temerity to say they support both gay marriage AND polygamy, or don't care either way.

I'm sorry you feel that way @taranimator and @therealblankman. I think by now, after years, you understand I'm not here to merely piss in the punchbowl. I don't see how bringing up a very valid point about a serious legal and societal issue is 'hate'. As lovely as this video may be, it's still political propaganda, because everything is political. Everything. It was like this before we all got here and will be like that long after we're gone.

@therealblankman A better analogy would be me warning you there are possible turds in the garden before you go a-strolling. You're now more informed about the consequences.

If you think I'm wrong, so be it. Defend your position. Why gay marriage but not plural marriage? Because in your heart you "know" gays are sincere but 3 people can't be in love?

I'm sorry, did I say anything discriminatory against polygamists?
By all means, do go right ahead and marry a whole bunch of dudes if it'll make you happy
I really think people worry too much about other people's private lives.
Life is short. Have a nice ride.

Why is there a problem with 3 people being married? I don't see the problem, if all three want to be married - either all three to all three, or one with two others. In the end, it's about people. If they want to, then go nuts.

Marriage is a stupid convention anyways, a mincing of words, a contract by any other name is still a contract. And that's all it is.
>> ^quantumushroom:

You misunderstand my point, as well an intent. I don't 'hate' gays and will go so far as to say it appears there is biological evidence for homosexuality (aka born this way).
I'm not even against gay marriage per se.
What I am saying is here is the side effect 'you' will create by supporting legalized gay marriage, and that is that 'you' then have no grounds for keeping polygamy illegal. You are "hating" and discriminating against polygamists and others supporting 'plural marriage', including, ironically, gay polygamists.
I've brought this up before and some sifters had the temerity to say they support both gay marriage AND polygamy, or don't care either way.
I'm sorry you feel that way @taranimator and @therealblankman. I think by now, after years, you understand I'm not here to merely piss in the punchbowl. I don't see how bringing up a very valid point about a serious legal and societal issue is 'hate'. As lovely as this video may be, it's still political propaganda, because everything is political. Everything. It was like this before we all got here and will be like that long after we're gone.
@therealblankman A better analogy would be me warning you there are possible turds in the garden before you go a-strolling. You're now more informed about the consequences.
If you think I'm wrong, so be it. Defend your position. Why gay marriage but not plural marriage? Because in your heart you "know" gays are sincere but 3 people can't be in love?

@gwiz665

Personally I don't give two shits about whatever consenting adults do- sexually, maritally, orally, anally or whateverly. The problem with polygamy isn't the multiple spouses per se, it's what accompanies it, such as child abuse, the severe repression of women, and domestic violence.

Polygamy is a sensitive subject here in Canada and especially in BC. A recent case involving a polygamous Muslim marriage in Ontario went a little sideways when a man and his second wife actually murdered the first wife and her 3 daughters in some sick nasty "honour" thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafia_family_murders

In BC there has been an ongoing case involving a small Mormon community called Bountiful. The Polygamous men there have been trafficking in young pre-pubescent girls, marrying them and consummating those "marriages". Pretty fucked up stuff. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bountiful,_British_Columbia

It's pretty hard to support Polygamy when such consequences seem to follow naturally. The above examples are admittedly extreme, but hardly isolated or unprecedented.

That's not predicated by the polygamy. People make the same argument for gay marriage - all the horror and gay disease that follows with gay marriage.

I can agree that polygamy provides an excuse for crazy people to do crazy things, like Porn also does (if we remember that discussion). It attracts the wrong crowd. That said, principally there's nothing wrong with polygamy.

Muslims have a funny sense of honor..
>> ^therealblankman:

@gwiz665
Personally I don't give two shits about whatever consenting adults do- sexually, maritally, orally, anally or whateverly. The problem with polygamy isn't the multiple spouses per se, it's what accompanies it, such as child abuse, the severe repression of women, and domestic violence.
Polygamy is a sensitive subject here in Canada and especially in BC. A recent case involving a polygamous Muslim marriage in Ontario went a little sideways when a man and his second wife actually murdered the first wife and her 3 daughters in some sick nasty "honour" thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafia_family_murders
In BC there has been an ongoing case involving a small Mormon community called Bountiful. The Polygamous men there have been trafficking in young pre-pubescent girls, marrying them and consummating those "marriages". Pretty fucked up stuff. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bountiful,_British_Columbia
It's pretty hard to support Polygamy when such consequences seem to follow naturally. The above examples are admittedly extreme, but hardly isolated or unprecedented.

You're correct about polygamy tending to flourish within misogynistic, inbred religious extremist cults. Polygamy doesn't bother me in the slightest. What bothers me are people twisting religious custom into a mask for evil and abuse. Evil hides in all sorts of places where there's an unbendable power hierarchy - Sports teams, Boy Scouts, the armed forces, Residential Schools, etc.

The Shafia trial has just ended not far from where I live. Members of the Muslim community repeated the same message: this is not about religion, this is about abuse -- abuse of women and abuse of power. I heard over and over again from devout Muslims that the only people who would interpret the Koran as condoning 'honour' killing are certifiably insane.

Back to the original topic, gay marriage. Like it or not, an inclusive society must by definition include many conflicting opinions, even bigoted ones.

@taraminator I would never take any steps to preclude any hate-filled bigot their opinion. Doesn't mean they ought to go unchallenged.

@therealblankman - so right you are.
I used to be more strident but over the years I've realized people's opinions change so slowly, if at all. So I pick and choose my battles.

>> ^taranimator:

@therealblankman - so right you are.
I used to be more strident but over the years I've realized people's opinions change so slowly, if at all. So I pick and choose my battles.


Well, QM's a long-term pet project of mine. I sincerely doubt that he'll be able to make a return to humanity, but perhaps we can prevent other from following down the dark path he's chosen.

Once again, qm comes in with an argument that somehow manages to be both wrong and completely irrelevant at the same time and derails the thread. One of these days, I will make a timelapse video of such a comment thread and see if Deano will let me post it in skilful, for it is truly epic trolling.

As for the video itself. Isn't it refreshing to see a video with Christians who actually deserve the name? They're one of the few examples I've seen of people actually following Christs teachings. Kudos to them.

Funny how Morals are trotted out when this comes up.

Its less about who is doing to whom in the bedroom,but more of the fact that by wanting marrige,thy are choosing to commit to each other. Financially and legally. If two people cohabitating for decades,however the emotional and sexual arrangements might be,and one gets SICK,they need some sort of legal structure in order to help the sick person. A room mate has no legal rights...a spouse DOES.Marrige is a way of guarenteeing these rights,to say to that other person,"I'm There For You".

Isn't THAT Moral?

And as for poligamy...I can see that as another legitimate excuse for marrige...let the players of that game work out the social logistics themselves. Protect what their unions spawn. And lastly,for the Intolorant Religious out there...you need not participate in any of this. They ain't marrying you.And Religion is too fragile a Glass House for any of you to be lobbing Moral Stones from.

I want as many people as possible to be happy in this life without qualification of any kind. What ever that takes it is worth it.

"Trolling" by the standards of the left is anyone from the non-left disagreeing.

It's easy for anyone to be lulled to sleep as the schools, Vancouverwood, 99% of the media and presently the White House all chant the same socialist claptrap, leaving out the verse about who has to pay for it.

You should be grateful to have your views challenged.


>> ^ChaosEngine:

Once again, qm comes in with an argument that somehow manages to be both wrong and completely irrelevant at the same time and derails the thread. One of these days, I will make a timelapse video of such a comment thread and see if Deano will let me post it in skilful, for it is truly epic trolling.
As for the video itself. Isn't it refreshing to see a video with Christians who actually deserve the name? They're one of the few examples I've seen of people actually following Christs teachings. Kudos to them.

>> ^quantumushroom:

"Trolling" by the standards of the left is anyone from the non-left disagreeing.
It's easy for anyone to be lulled to sleep as the schools, Vancouverwood, 99% of the media and presently the White House all chant the same socialist claptrap, leaving out the verse about who has to pay for it.
You should be grateful to have your views challenged.

I welcome having my views challenged, but with you it's less of a "challenge" and more of a "confirmation that the American right are a bunch of troglodytes without an original thought among them"