If gay marriage is legal, permissible, acceptable, respectable, laudable… Then many of the arguments used to support it apply equally so, or even more so, to polygamy.
Polygamy, like gay marriage, is between consensual (and ostensibly adult) parties.
Polygamy, like gay marriagee, ‘doesn’t hurt anyone’.
Polygamy has been practised and even instituted throughout human history across multiple cultures… Unlike gay marriage which was completely unheard of until very recent times.
Polygamy is sanctioned by Islam and was formerly permissible in ancient Biblical history… Unlike gay marriage and any form of homosexual activity which is forbidden by all three Abrahamic faiths. (Wait, don’t tell me you’re gonna be all Islamophobic and oppose polygamy while supporting homosexuality?!!)
Polygamy can be argued to possibly provide the same benefits towards children, families and society as monogamous marriage… Unlike gay marriage.
So drawing from the advances hard-won by proponents of homosexuality…
Each of a person’s multiple spouses should receive full partner benefits, just as same-sex partners do.
Students attending proms must be allowed to bring all their multiple partners, just as homosexual students are allowed to bring a partner of the same gender. And selecting only one prom king/queen/in-between must be considered mono-normatively discriminatory.
If you don’t support it (especially if you do support gay marriage), I have only this to say: WHY ARE YOU SUCH HATEFUL BIGOTS?!!! YOU BACKWARDS POLYGAMOPHOBES!!! FUTURE, MORE ENLIGTHTENED GENERATIONS WILL LOOK DOWN UPON YOU IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY!!!
And speaking of the slippery slope, from The Gospel Coalition:
5. Legalizing same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of “marriage” in other cases.
If marriage is a contract based primarily on romantic feelings, why should the state discriminate against brothers and sisters who wish to marry? If a bisexual insists on the need for both a male and a female spouse in order to be satisfied, why should the law discriminate in favor of couples instead of threesomes?
(Think this is far-fetched? Brazil already has a case on the books: a civil union for a trio. The notary cited the changing definition of marriage and family as justification. This columnist from the UK agrees. Why resist?)
Those in favor of same-sex marriage say traditional marriage laws are discriminatory. If we apply the same standard across the board, we must admit same-sex marriage is discriminatory too. Any law that regulates marriage establishes limits. Discussing marriage laws should prompt us to ask the question no one is asking: just what is marriage anyway?
See also related: