Responding to the wishes of the people who put them in office is the basis of our whole electorial process. And if you think your elected representative is not adequately representing you, you vote for a better candidate in the next election. That's the black and white of politics.
Oh, certainment! And the reasons, whys and wherefores of the populace on one side or the other is never mentioned, investigated, discussed, debated or weighed on the news, by the pundits, by the buddies over drinks, or even in say, a thread about same?
You know you're probably right. This discussion is not even an issue.
In fact, its so black and white and clear-cut, we shouldnt even need to talk about it. This non-issue, clear-cut, black and white subject that you've debated in excess of 5 posts in just the last few days, isnt murky or grey at all.
But of course that's ridiculous because child-porn is a crime, just like bigamy. ...... Same-sex marriage is not a crime, no one is going to jail for it. ......I can be strongly ...... against bigamy because ...... polygamy is a crime....... And no matter how you slice it, bigamy is a crime. ...... I ... am prejudiced against criminals and .... a hardliner on crime. Polygamous groups ... are no more the subject of government discrimination than are ... any other criminal. It's a crime, same-sex marriage is not. .... No matter how you try, you can't get past that major basic difference. .... These are good people and it hurts to see them ... compared with criminals
I think I see the crux of our disagreement. You seem to be arguing that since polygamy is currently considered a crime, it therefore IS a crime. It is, because it is. So, in other words, because something IS, it should continue to BE. To me, that's begging the question, and is indicative of circular reasoning. Following that line of thought, homosexuality should be a crime as well, because, for example, in the recent centuries of american jurisprudence, the crime of sodomy was codified into just about all state law. It has since been repealed in most states, and is not enforced in others.
Polygamy (bigamy) is a crime on the books NOW. And you argue that since we said it was a crime, it therefore IS a crime. In other words, you seem to suggest that our criminalization of it alone is proof enough of its moral turpitude, because God knows we would only criminalize things that are morally despicable.
But homosexuality was once a crime as well, wasnt it? And if you are to remain consistent in the application of your argument, you would then need to argue that either
(1) homosexuality is still morally despicable and remains a crime, because we all decided that it was at the time, or
(2) saying something is morally despicable and a crime (codifying it into law) does not forestall re-investigating it in the future to legalize it and remove its criminality (or accepted (a)morality).
In my worldview, what is or is not a crime is based on nebulous social mores, and determined by the society that exists at the time. Old crimes are repealed, new crimes are written into law. We decide what is socially (or morally) unacceptable and a crime based on public sentiment at the time, and legislate that into law.
So to imply that the "simple" and "obvious" difference between gay marriage and polygamy is that polygamy is a CRIME - is a real end-run argument, and it fails to consider the larger picture.
EDIT: Hey ruf - I got your profile comment, and I appreciate it - we're on the same page man!
in spite of everything we're talking about, let me take this moment to dial it down a notch and ...well.....
...Hug it out!
cheers buddy!