RC> Hello All!

 RC> When gay marriage was at the forefront of the political
 RC> debates, our liberal bretheren defended it by basically
 RC> stating that if 2 people loved one another, why should
 RC> society stand in the way?

 I don't recall it being defended that way? Maybe some people
 did, but it is false to say "our liberal brethern" did as not
 all did use that justification.

 It's a valid point, of course, but that wasn't the point above.

 It is also a libertarian point, even more than liberal, and
 many *REAL* conservatives agree with that point, on the
 principle of keeping government out of private lives.

 I have even had a conservative tell me the govt should get out
 of marriage altogether. The idea was all unions the govt
 sanctions would be civil unions, and marriage if the business of
 churches and private choices.

 RC> They scoffed at the notion presented by the opposing
 RC> viewspoint that gay marriage tarnishes the institution of
 RC> marriage, commonly defined as the union of a man and a
 RC> woman.

 Which is also a valid point. The notion deserves scoffing.

 Scoff! Scoff! Scoff!

 RC> I am curious about how our liberal bretheren feel about
 RC> marriages involving 3 or more people, as to why these
 RC> should be illegal, question is asked because I havent seen
 RC> any champion this.

 Our "Liberal Brethern" hold about a thousand different views on
 this, differening in kind and degree. To ask what a liberal view
 is on this is meaningless unless you give your official
 recognized authority.

 Ok, I'll take on the job.

 Marriage, and other officially recognized institutions, are
 valid as they contribute to the survival and advancement of the
 human race. Basic principle of evolutionary morality.

 Same sex marriage serves to remove from the heterosexual
 marriage pool those who are not heterosexual, and therefor don't
 belong in that pool.

 Therefore, same sex marriage is, at the least, irrelevant to the
 goal, and thus not in conflict with the goals of evolutionary
 morality. To an extent it is in accord with the goals.

 OTOH, multi-party marriages reduce the effectiveness of genetic
 diversity, and therefore are contrary to the values of
 evolutionary morality. Among animals life is more instinct
 driven, and niche based. Among humans life depends more on
 adaptibility and diversity.

 Plural marriage decreases genetic diversity, as either one man
 is impregnating multiple women, or one woman is having sex with
 multiple men, but it's rare she would become pregnant by more
 than one man at one time. In the long run those men will produce
 fewer offspring by each man, unless that woman spends a lot of
 time pregnant.

 In addition, it would be necessary to keep track of who fathered
 what child with what mother, to avoid inbreeding.

 Monogamy is just plain easier.

 And it avoids having people out there trying to kill you because
 you have extra wives and they want some. Or extra husbands for
 the women.

 Monogamy is much simpler, easier, and neater.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... When you get there, there isn't any there anymore.
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5