The other ones

[obfuscator]

Well as society stands today, homosexuality in part becomes more and more acceptable. Obviously this isn't the case world wide, but if recent events are to continue down their logical path I think it's safe to say the world is not far away from largely legalizing homosexual marriages.

 

The purpose of this thread isn't to debate on the morality of such an issue (I think we can all agree there have been enough opportunities for that) but rather to discuss an unanswered question:

 

What about the other sexualities?

 

In Canada at least, one of the biggest reasons used by those not in favor of legalizing homosexual marriages was that the definition of marriage is between a man and a women. Since this definition has to be struck down wherever homosexual marriage is legalized, it leaves the door open for other sexualities to claim they have a right to marriage.

 

What I want to know is, where is the line? What sexualities should be considered appropriate (allowed to marry) and which should not? Please post yes/no and reasons, I'll list a few main ones.

 

Polygamy - The most obvious. This is a sexuality that allows men to take multiple wives (or vice versa, though that's rarely heard of)

Zoophilia - Similar to bestiality, so I'll lump them together. Bestiality is sexual attraction to animals (non human) and zoophilia is the love (in a spousal form) of such animals.

Pedophilia - Sexual relationships with minors, usually before puberty.

Objectum Sexuality - Sexual attraction and relations to inanimate objects.

Incest - Sexual attraction to immediate family members

 

 

These are the main ones I can think of, I'm curious to hear your opinions.

 

Ps. If you have any more sexualities you think merit discussion I'll add them to the first post.

 

edit: I will be playing devil's advocate in this thread, fyi

[K4ylan]

Polygamy- kinda on the fence about this one, but I'm going to have to say no to this.

 

The other 3- No, no, and heeeeeelllllll noo.

[obfuscator]

Polygamy- kinda on the fence about this one, but I'm going to have to say no to this.

 

The other 3- No, no, and heeeeeelllllll noo.

Why though?

 

If one man and three women legitimately want to get married, with no forced mentality, abuse or otherwise, why should we stop them?

 

Same goes for the other three.

 

The only thing I see that goes against that is that children can't give consent, but I'm sure someone would be able to argue that a child at or past the age of reason (7) can give something resembling consent.

[Iamdan]

What about if marriage was between '2 consenting adults,' problem solved.

 

Either that or fix the issues that are caused by homosexuals not being allowed to marry. The option for people to nominate a couple of non family members to be able to visit them in hospital for example, or just have an exception for homosexual couples.

 

zoophilia: not a person, can't give consent

pedophilia: the child is not old enough to marry anyway because they can't give consent

objectum sexuality: not a person, can't give consent

[Danny_TeamDan]

Polygamy - I can see people arguing for this.

Zoophilia - o boy

Pedophilia - I wonder what would happen if people argued for this to change (b& and v&)

Objectum Sexuality - Would some one really want to marry an object o.o? what benefits would there be to getting married? So don't think this will be allowed.

 

Overall I guess it's:

 

Open to it

no

no

lol no

 

EDIT: Y guy marry me

[obfuscator]

Polygamy - I can see people arguing for this.

Zoophilia - o boy

Pedophilia - I wonder what would happen if people argued for this to change (b& and v&)

Objectum Sexuality - Would some one really want to marry an object o.o? what benefits would there be to getting married? So don't think this will be allowed.

 

Overall I guess it's:

 

Open to it

no

no

lol no

 

EDIT: Y guy marry me

Deal, but only if you can get everton to officiate!

[Roberthree]

This just in, men, horses, infants, and rocks are all the same thing!

[tortilliachp]

whole trend of this thread seems to be "slippery slope" from gay morality slips to anything. Thus condemning gay marriage by association.

 

why not polygamy? taxation / civil rights.

why not pedophilia? illegal almost everywhere, no reason why these things would affect each other.

 

the other two are so obvious they don't need any kind of comment from anyone.

[Myweponsg00d]

First of all, an animal and an object are not human beings, so there would be no reason to legally join the two of you.

 

Secondly, the case of pedophilia is more a question of the age of consent. Also, if you want to argue that a pedophile should be able to marry his under-18 girlfriend, then eventually that person is going to get older and won't be a child anymore. So if you want to acknowledge pedophilia as a legitimate sexuality, there is no way that he could ever marry a person because that person wont be underage forever...

 

Thirdly, polygamy has valid ground to stand on and IMO should be getting legal attention. If a group of consenting adults all want to be married I don't think theres any reason why they shouldnt be able to.

 

And finally, the "slippery slope" argument is a classic defense mechanism that people use when they have completely run out of logical support for their argument. The "how far should is this going to go???" thing serves as no defense for your viewpoint. Nothing could ever be accomplished if this was a valid argument.

 

Some examples:

Q. Should we raise the drinking age to 22?

A. OMG whats next, 55?!!?!?

 

Q. Should we put more security regulations in place at the airport?

A. OMG whats next, people have to fly naked??

 

Q. Should we cut taxes by 0.5%?

A. OMG whats next, no taxes?? Would you like that?? How are we going to get money without any taxes? What a stupid idea...

 

Legislation gets handled on a case by case basis. Not by looking at an overly broad picture that may or may not be in the same line of thought.

[obfuscator]

whole trend of this thread seems to be "slippery slope" from gay morality slips to anything. Thus condemning gay marriage by association.

 

why not polygamy? taxation / civil rights.

why not pedophilia? illegal almost everywhere, no reason why these things would affect each other.

 

the other two are so obvious they don't need any kind of comment from anyone.

 

Yes, polygamy could be seen as exploitation of tax, but since any marriage does this it's seen as legitimate. In terms of civil rights, I agree that often women's rights tend to be shafted by polygamous marraiges but if the women truly wanted such a union why does society have a right to stop them?

 

Pedophilia - age of consent, again. A 60 year old man can not have a sexual relationship with a 17 year old, but is there really any difference between a 17 and 18 year old?

 

The other two may not be as obvious - in India recently a man was allowed to marry a goat - I'll try to find the source.

[Wizz]

I remember seeing this on Taboo.

Wasn't another big one arranged marriages of children, for aristocracy or something.

[obfuscator]

First of all, an animal and an object are not human beings, so there would be no reason to legally join the two of you.

 

Secondly, the case of pedophilia is more a question of the age of consent. Also, if you want to argue that a pedophile should be able to marry his under-18 girlfriend, then eventually that person is going to get older and won't be a child anymore. So if you want to acknowledge pedophilia as a legitimate sexuality, there is no way that he could ever marry a person because that person wont be underage forever...

 

Thirdly, polygamy has valid ground to stand on and IMO should be getting legal attention. If a group of consenting adults all want to be married I don't think theres any reason why they shouldnt be able to.

 

And finally, the "slippery slope" argument is a classic defense mechanism that people use when they have completely run out of logical support for their argument. The "how far should is this going to go???" thing serves as no defense for your viewpoint. Nothing could ever be accomplished if this was a valid argument.

 

Some examples:

Q. Should we raise the drinking age to 22?

A. OMG whats next, 55?!!?!?

 

Q. Should we put more security regulations in place at the airport?

A. OMG whats next, people have to fly naked??

 

Q. Should we cut taxes by 0.5%?

A. OMG whats next, no taxes?? Would you like that?? How are we going to get money without any taxes? What a stupid idea...

 

Legislation gets handled on a case by case basis. Not by looking at an overly broad picture that may or may not be in the same line of thought.

 

You've just admitted yourself that polygamous marriages should be acceptable. If I told you, 100 years ago, that one day gay people would be allowed to marry you'd laugh in my face. Today, if I tell you that humans would be able to marry animals at some point in the future, you'd laugh in my face, but what makes you so sure society would never see this as acceptable?

 

This isn't about a slippery slope - I'm not here to debate the morality of homosexual marriages, but I'm simply curious to see what people think of other possible changes in the future(distant or no so).

[Napalm]

Seeing as marriage is meant to be between humans, we can rule out Objectum Sexuality and Zoophilia. Furthermore, I don't see how marriage could benefit any of those relationships.

 

I see nothing wrong with polygamy to be honest, as long as all the people involved agree with it.

 

And for pedophilia, well, it depends on the age of the minor. Some countries have a very low age of consent, but the age at which one is capable of doing such decisions can vary from person to person, so it's a rather delicate subject.

[Cynic]

Zoophilia and Objectum: The other party cannot think freely, and therefore cannot legally consent to the marriage.

 

Polygamy: I guess this is fine, so long as the rights of the more numerous gender do not get ignored.

 

Pedophilia: Honestly, I'd have to say no (to most ages, anyway). As a fourteen-year-old going through puberty, I can attest to the fact that I'm extremely reckless and impulsive, even though I am considered thoughtful and intelligent when compared to my peers. I'd say that up until about 17, everything going on in your life doesn't really allow you to make choices that you have to seriously consider. Besides that, a very few amount of kids 15 and under would even consider dating anyone out of high school (except the reeeeally promiscuous ones), and from 16-17, it depends on the person. The age of consent can be considered high, but think back to when you were a teenager; Did you really think how things would affect the rest of your life?

[Sam]

Just try and keep it clean is all we say ;)

 

-Sam

[Myweponsg00d]

 

You've just admitted yourself that polygamous marriages should be acceptable. If I told you, 100 years ago, that one day gay people would be allowed to marry you'd laugh in my face. Today, if I tell you that humans would be able to marry animals at some point in the future, you'd laugh in my face, but what makes you so sure society would never see this as acceptable?

 

 

I think that all cases of marriage between one consenting human adult and another consenting human adult should and will be legalized eventually.

 

I dont think a human will ever be able to marry an animal because animals have no legal power or place in the state. I mean, its like saying I want to adopt my lamp as my child. It just cant happen because a lamp is not a child. An animal is not a human and does not have a social security number, etc to make it a legal actor in the state.

 

We don't just want gay marraige because we want people to express their sexuality via something called marriage. We want gay marriage because married heterosexuals have legal benefits for being legally joined to another human.

 

If anything, your post just kinda proves how silly the institution of marriage is to begin with. Its just some social custom that doesn't really make any sense once you think about it. I am just concerned with homosexuals and polygamists having equal acess to legal benefits of marriage.

 

Add asexuality to your list above :razz:

"Should I be able to marry myself? I love myself more than anyone in the world and want to make a lifetime commitment to being alone"

[Alg]

Isn't asexuality pretty much disinterest in sex? If the 'a' prefix means no/not, it would be at least.

Not love with oneself.

[obfuscator]

Isn't asexuality pretty much disinterest in sex? If the 'a' prefix means no/not, it would be at least.

Not love with oneself.

Right you are, I've removed it.

[Romy]

Isn't asexuality pretty much disinterest in sex? If the 'a' prefix means no/not, it would be at least.

Not love with oneself.

 

Exactly so.

 

 

 

Other than that, homosexuality does not even border any of those. Other than asexuality, which is technically a sexual orientation, the rest are either one-sided perversions, or cultural preferances.

 

The fact that certain religions defined marriage as uniting a man and a woman, does not make them own the term. Other religions (shamefully, not very popular today) did support gay marriage. Neither Christianity, nor Judiasm, nor Islam, have a veto over marriage. And the point of this? Explaning that gay marriages are not crossing any borders - none at all. Homosexual/lesbian marriages are not a precedent to any other type of marriages. If polygamous marriages will be largely legal (which is not something I disagree with), it'll have nothing to do with legalizing gay marriages. If beastial marriages will be legalized (which is something I disagree with), it'll have nothing to do with legalizing gay marriages. Same for the other types.

[TTanT]

but is there really any difference between a 17 and 18 year old?

Is there a difference between a 3 and 4 year old?

A 4 and a 5 year old?

A 5 and a 6 year old?

A 6 and a 7 year old?

A 7 and an 8 year old?

An 8 And a 9 year old?

A 9 and a 10 year old?

A 10 and an 11 year old?

An 11 and a 12 year old?

A 12 and a 13 year old?

A 13 and a 14 year old?

A 14 and a 15 year old?

A 15 and a 16 year old?

A 16 and a 17 year old?

 

By your logic, dating a 3 year old is really the same thing as dating an 18 year old.

Sorry, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

 

And this is coming from a almost-17 year old with a 14 year old girlfriend.

[Wizz]

I think he meant to say a 17 years old (Not Legal Adult yet) dating an 18 year old (Legally an Adult). There's always some problems from these.

[Saru Inc]

1) I've never had a problem with polygamy, or polygamous marriages. They happened in the bible allllllllllll the time.

 

2) Bestiality, as Cycnic stated, would never happen, because one party can't really consent.

 

3) Pedophilia impossible. Under 18 they are under their parents unless emancipated. Plus, it's easy for older people to manipulate younger. Though in all reality, I wouldn't mind if this passed. ONLY IF IT WAS PROVEN BOTH PARTIES WOULD CONSENT. AND, the older party would not be abusive. As is often the case.

[Faux]

polygamy already happens. "swing" clubs exist. not to mention male muslims can marry more than one woman though not a fair comparison since women are treated like animals in that religion/culture.

 

bestiality's fault is animals can't "consent." one would probably argue animals can't exactly say "yeah have sex with me", but can they show it through their behavior? if so, does it mean bestiality should be legal?

 

pedophilia - some kids hit puberty at 8, some at 16. canada's AOC was just at 14 a few years ago. other countries dont even have legal AOC or just dont enforce it.

 

and the object sexuality already plays out in japan where freaks marry anime figures. kinda sad lol

[Flodder450]

Polygamy - Hmm,well, i honestly dont care if one has multiple wives-i myself wouldnt do it though :P

Zoophilia - Sick, just sick, a big NO for me :thumbdown:

Pedophilia - same as above

Objectum Sexuality - I never heard of this before 0_o

[Saru Inc]

Polygamy - Hmm,well, i honestly dont care if one has multiple wives-i myself wouldnt do it though :P

Zoophilia - Sick, just sick, a big NO for me :thumbdown:

Pedophilia - same as above

Objectum Sexuality - I never heard of this before 0_o

 

 

 

THere was a nip/tuck episode on it. Pretty hilarious, if I may say so myself.