Polygamists' defense cites gay marriage

[Chris_]

Polygamists' defense cites gay marriage
January 21, 2009
Canoe Newss
By Jeremy Hainsworth, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Excerpt:
Winston Blackmore, a spiritual leader in B.C.'s community of Bountiful, speaks to media before a press conference in his community on Thursday, January 8. Blackmore and James Oler, rival leaders in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, were arrested on Jan. 7, each charged with one count of polygamy. (Sun Media/Lyle Aspinall)

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Canada’s decision to legalize gay marriage has paved the way for polygamy to be legal as well, a defense lawyer said Wednesday as the two leaders of rival polygamous communities made their first court appearance.

The case is the first to test Canada’s polygamy laws.

Winston Blackmore, 52, and James Oler, 44, are each accused of being married to more than one woman at a time. The charges carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison, British Columbia Attorney General Wally Oppal said.

But Blackmore’s lawyer, Blair Suffredine, said during a telephone interview that marriage standards in Canada have changed.

“If (homosexuals) can marry, what is the reason that public policy says one person can’t marry more than one person?” said Suffredine, a former provincial lawmaker. Canada’s Parliament extended full marriage rights to same-sex couples in 2005.
+++++++++
Huh, so slippery slopes DO exist.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Perfectly legitimate point.   

[Chris_]

YES YES YES!!!!

I have been waiting for this!!

We know why Marriage is between a man and a woman.  They procreate and create a nuclear family, which thousands of years have told us is the optimal (optimum?) way to maintain and support a family.

As far as gay marriage goes -- why 2?  What is the biological or sociological context for supporting a marriage of 2 non-reproducing people?  Why not Mother/Son, Father/Daughter, Mother/Daughter?  Mother/Daughter/Son?

If reproduction is out of the mix then there is no reason not to support n people married to n other people.

And they say gay marriage isn't a threat to traditional marriage.

[DumbAss Tanker]

YES YES YES!!!!

I have been waiting for this!!

We know why Marriage is between a man and a woman.  They procreate and create a nuclear family, which thousands of years have told us is the optimal (optimum?) way to maintain and support a family.

As far as gay marriage goes -- why 2?  What is the biological or sociological context for supporting a marriage of 2 non-reproducing people?  Why not Mother/Son, Father/Daughter, Mother/Daughter?  Mother/Daughter/Son?

If reproduction is out of the mix then there is no reason not to support n people married to n other people.

And they say gay marriage isn't a threat to traditional marriage.

Even polygamous or polyandrous marriages are more traditional than gay marriages, and optimal or not have been a part of the history of human culture.  I like to say that throughout human history, marriage has always consisted of at least one woman on one side and at least one man on the other, and anything else was NEVER a marriage over the last 5000 years...until AIDS hit and the gay community decided to raid the insurance benefits of REAL families to pay for the consequences of their perversions.