I can't help but notice that Suzan Mazur, in an article on Counterpunch where she criticizes extralegal polyamy in Utah, Arizona, ans a few other states, does not simply condem nthe way polygamy is practiced in these states, but seems to attack polygamy per se.
My question: isn't equating polygamy and taking child brides the same thing as trying to equate adult homosexualtiy with same-sex pedophilia?
And like it or not, some form of legalized polygamy is inevitable if marriage iscontinually construed as a "right," without restrictions based on who the partners are.
Do to issues of age of consent, it is unlikely that the US will ever legalize "child brides" as a matter of federal policy (although actually, some states have very low age of consent laws if the parents agree to let their children get married - I think I read on Andrew Sullivan that people as young as 12 can get marrried in Massachusetts). However, there is no principled reason to oppose polygamy in general once you have declared that the sex of the partners is irrelevant.
And I am again reminded of Steve Sailer's comment that people don't see polygamy as a civil right because the only people interested in it are white religious people and civil rights don't apply to them.
That is all.
No comments:
Post a Comment