Gay marriage doesn't lead to polygamy...
I've known this for some time...nice to see Jonathan Kay say so...
First, polygamy is not about to become the law of the land. Gay marriage prevailed because it was a darling of Canada's dominant left-wing political faction. Polygamy, on the other hand, is opposed by both right-wing traditionalists and left-wing feminists, who (rightly) doubt that a marriage between an overbearing religious kook and a bunch of frocked teenagers could ever take place on equal terms.The plain fact of the matter is that marriage has always been changing, and same-sex marriage has nothing to do with polygamy...
Second, even if polygamy makes it through the courts, Warren can't put the blame on gay marriage. The two are related only in the sense that both are independent symptoms of a society gradually cutting itself adrift from traditional Judeo-Christian mores. Correlation does not imply causation.
In fact, it's unclear to me whether gay marriage has had any broad liberalizing effect on our society — notwithstanding the hysterical prophesies emitted by social conservatives upon its inception.
A recent poll of 5,500 Canadian teenagers shows that, if anything, the next generation of brides and grooms will be more responsible and conventionally bourgeois than its forebears (despite a marked decline in religiosity). A full 90% of female teenagers said they expected to stay with the same partner for life. Ninety-one percent of female teenagers said they expected to get married — up from 86% in a similar survey of teenagers conducted 17 years ago. Ninety-five percent of male teenagers said they expected to have children, up from 83% in 1992.
"Gay marriage is not a trivial little addition to the existing law of marriage," David Frum wrote in the National Post a decade ago. "It implies a demolition of the entire old structure. The vandals in our courts and bureaucracies delight in this destruction." Really? I have a few friends set to tie the knot in 2009 — gay and otherwise — and they seem to be approaching the big day with exactly the same mix of excitement and solemnity that I remember back in my time. I guess they never got the so-con memo about the institution being "demolished" by "homosexual activists."
It's been almost six years since my home province of Ontario adopted gay marriage — long enough for the promised social apocalypse to dawn. It hasn't yet, and it never will. If you want to fight polygamy, do so with my blessing — but please don't blame gay marriage for some imagined slouching toward Gomorrah.
posted by GayandRight @ 10:11 AM
6 Comments:
BIG HOMO lobby sends out useful idiot Jonathan Kay to secure their gains (same sex marriage) and lull Canadian public back to sleep while feminists prepare their coup.
Jonathan Kay quickly becomes a master of spin and deception.
He masterfully poses the obvious connection between same sex marriage and polygamy first and than goes to demolish it by presenting various contrived arguments.
Issue of old radical feminists solving their fertility problems by "marry young womb for a while" arrangements never show up on a radar screen as mere possibility, forget showing up as a driving force of concerted efforts under way to legalise polygamy in Canada.
Prospect of feminazis sending their partners overseas in search of perfect baby breeders to be broght home as second wives, kept in a basement and used as disposable wombs does not enter Jonathan's picture. Prospect of imported baby breeders delivering babies in Canadian hospitals and suffering from "chilbirth complications" that end their miserable lives, and prospect of these poor souls becoming multiple organ donors after their mission in Canada of delivering "perfect baby" is complete does not seem to enter Jonathan's mind either.
It was no coincident that Karla Homolka got such lenient treatment from homosexuals and feminazis running Ontario Attorney General's Office for her role in multiple murders of Ontario teenage girls; it was no coincident that Karla was allowed to keep her baby and move out of Canada. After all it was Karla who lead the way, and have shown feminazis and other sexual deviants that it does not matter what their partner do with other women, it does not matter how much fun they have with them if in the end these other women end up dead. Jonathan seem to ignore that very dark aspect of proposed legalisation on polygamy as well.
What we get from Jonathan instead is a straw men "overbearing religious kook and a bunch of frocked teenagers" or "creepy middle-aged perverts looking to bed down with multiple "wives."" who in Jonathan's opinion stand chance like a snowball in Hell to get their perverted dreams past big bad dog of Radical Feminism guarding the entrance to their "perverted paradise".
Jonathan's skilful redirection of public attention to a straw man and masterful deception of feminist ploy is finished off with graceful bow to his political friends and paymasters representing BIG HOMO lobby of Canada.
Well done Jonathan, well done.
Too bad Jonathan, that you seem to be unable to think dirty and you do not see that you are being used as a useful idiot of radical feminist cause. Too bad that you seem to be unable to think big and as a result are betting on a wrong horses as you could have done much better if you were to put your great skills to work for Stephen Harper or Michael Ignatieff instead of working for bunch of sexual deviants and their radical feminist friends whose days of glory are long over
"Polygamy, on the other hand, is opposed by both right-wing traditionalists and left-wing feminists"
How very short sighted. Polygamy is opposed by both sides NOW (just like homosexuality was at one time), but eventually the left will need something else to protest to keep the victim industry going - and now the line in the sand is set at polygamy. Also, you'd think you'd hear a little more out of those feminists about the way women are treated in muslim countries (where, by the way, polygamy is often tolerated), but you don't. Instead, they usually take the "muslim side" of that type of argument because they are fellow "victims". So I wouldn't hold them up as bastions of principle.
Plain and simple, polygamy is now inevitable after SSM. Once society aquires a stomach for it, someone will challenge the ban and use the exact same arguments as they did for SSM - which is now a precedent. Technically, the polygamists probably even have a stronger case than the gays did. They will undoubtedly also argue freedom of religion, which, unlike anything about the SSM situation, is actually in the constitution.
Interesting.
We just had a discussion a few days ago on the connection between SSM and further dilution to the institution of marriage such as polygamy. A couple days later, Kay comes out with this piece.
A few rebuttals:
1) "First, polygamy is not about to become the law of the land..." It already is. Polygamists in BC have not been prosecuted for decades, and now face probable victory on a constitutional challenge when they finally are charged. Ontario recognizes polygamous marriages as long as they were performed in other countries.
2) "...even if polygamy makes it through the courts, Warren can't put the blame on gay marriage." Many of the same arguments for polygamy are straight (no pun intended) from the gay agenda's playbook.
3) "In fact, it's unclear to me whether gay marriage has had any broad liberalizing effect on our society." 6 years is too short to see any detrimental effects. Kids take 20 years to grow, and the effects of tinkering with their foundation may not be apparent for several decades. Only now we are seeing the wasteland caused by no-fault divorce.
4) "...they seem to be approaching the big day with exactly the same mix of excitement and solemnity that I remember back in my time." I do feel that my own (hetero) marriage has been cheapened in the eyes of the state - no longer is it a fundamental building block of society and the foundation for raising children - apparently the state now thinks that it is simply a selfish contract between two persons.
6) "...don't blame gay marriage for some imagined slouching toward Gomorrah." Not to sound alarmist, but the abolishment of traditional marriage erases any notion that boundaries can and should be drawn.
Anonymous - please seek help.
Yeah, I don't get the Karla Homolka connection except the fact that the prosecution really screwed up since the tapes show she was a willing participant.
I do believe that there are Muslims in Canada now practicing polygamy and possibly getting welfare for several wives. I can't see the feminists being much of a barrior to polygamy since they have been useless in protesting against the abuse of women in Muslim countries and Muslim women here.
I too feel that marriage has been devalued. If more teenagers want to get married, I'm afraid like here in Quebec they will soon find there is no incentive to get married.
Legal marriage is an anachronism, it should be abolished.
Everyone should be treated equally before the law.
Religious people married before legal marriages existed and the only way to save the institution, if that is what people want to do, is to get the government interference out of it.
I'm kinda surprised at you, G&R. Seems to me that part of a conservative temperament is to be sensitive to the unintended consequences of changes, especially major changes to basic institutions.
Ontario already gives tacit ok to polygamous marriages by granting welfare benefits to Muslims with plural wives. Once the multicultural drum by which Trudeau and company eviscerated the old Canada gets banged and Muslims feel strong enough to press for it, along with Mormons out west, and you have groups of women pleading on TV to have their families and children recognized...on what grounds can you say no to this very ancient traditional and widespread form of marriage once you've made the very gender of the spouses irrelevant?
These things do not proceed by rational argument but by cultural change in assumption.
Check out Mark Steyn here
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/04/09/we%E2%80%99re-in-the-fast-lane-to-polygamy/
Steyn is not famous for being pro-gay, but he makes a good point, that once Muslims become strong in a society, gays get thrown under the bus.
and gay-marriage advocate Jonathan Rauch here
http://reason.com/news/show/117323.html
I'm a very gay man and have emotional sympathy for gay couples who want to be formally married, but this is a huge change in culture and society and one which, I fear, will make it harder and harder for there to be any "us" anymore, when faced with growing groups inside our countries who are, frankly, not only alien but hostile to Western values.
I think this is all way more volatile and destabilizing than you imagine.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home