SCOTUS Denies Same Sex Marriage Certs, Legal Majority Of US

[Philly]

[phosphide]

[Philly]

Actually it's not insulting to point out that homosexuality occurs among many species of animals and therefor can't just conveniently be dismissed as unnatural. It's just a fact. I know you don't want to respond to it but that doesn't change that it's a fact. You could argue, as Galt has, that it's a "defect" but even with that argument he acknowledged it is naturally occurring.

[uebermann]

[The Dharma Bum]

what about group marriage?

that should be legal too

[Libertarian602]

[The Dharma Bum]

[Libertarian602]

[eynon81]

[Philly]

I suppose group marriage brings up more complicated questions about the legal and tax perks of marriage. I'm sure that would have to be addressed somehow, but yeah as a matter of society recognizing it, I think it should be allowed. As we recognize that homosexuality is natural, we should also recognize that many people do not naturally tend toward monogamy, be it heterosexual or homosexual (in fact, for our species at least, monogamy would probably be pretty rare in nature. Thousands of years worth of social construct in favor of it and people still have extramarital affairs all the time). If all parties are consenting adults, I think we should recognize group marriages as we would 1 on 1.

This won't be happening any time soon though, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that our western understanding of group marriage is strongly associated with creepy religious cults and women being abused. It is rather ironic since the institution of marriage itself has been an extremely f**k up situation for women in general until very recently in history that we feel this way about group marriage but don't bat an eye at a two party heterosexual marriage.