[Thoran]

Originally posted by Maelakin: I believe I brought this up before in another thread, but it also pertains to this thread. Marriage in the eyes of the law is a business merger, in essence, between two people. Unless a contractual agreement is made before the union, all possessions between the pair are considered mutual holdings. In addition, each party is able to make decisions pertaining to the other party’s well being. Benefits are also bestowed upon the pair as a result of this union. For example, health insurance benefits now cover the other party. The above illustrates why polygamy is not at all related, or even in line, with a gay marriage. When you increase the number of individuals contained within the union, you also increase the monetary cost to third parties. Insurances companies, for example, now have to cover three individuals, if one additional party was involved, instead of the normal two individuals. By legalizing polygamy, you also institute a reorganization of most medical and benefit packages intrinsically tied into every company. Marriage overall is an outdated practice. All benefits associated with marriage should be removed and each person should act as their own party, much like Timber stated. If people still want to get married, they can understand it is for no reason other than the symbolism it presents. There is no sanctimony in marriage anymore. Attempting to draw a correlation between gay marriage and polygamy may at first glance seem easy, but once you realize marriage is nothing like it once was and is a business venture, it completely changes the outlook. In effect, by having multiple wives/husbands, you are stealing from companies who have, because of the laws, established marriage to include two parties…no more.

Interesting way of looking at the issue, I'll have to think about it. I would however disagree that there is no sanctimony in marriage anymore, I think that you get out of it what you put in... irregardless of your sexual orientation. Long term relationships are darn tough, and as Night Stalker acidicaly pointed out, too many people out there cut and run whenever things don't go their way. I think this is why I overall support the idea of Gay Unions, whatever the name... if they're willing to stick with eachother for the long term they deserve the rights that married couples have. It worries me a little (I wonder when the fire and brimstone are going to start falling), but sexual preference just doesn't seem like a good reason to discriminate against anyone. (of course that won't keep me from arguing the other side... because what would life be without a good argument on occasion).