Re: [UUPoly-L] UU minister blogger's comments on IAs and UUPA

[Anita Wagner <imapolygirl@yahoo.com>]

Kelly Cookson <kc62301@hotmail.com> wrote:
  >It may turn out that plural
>marriage becomes legal 20 years earlier (in, say, 20 years
>instead of 40, optimistically) specifically because the
>opponents of gay marriage brought it up.

You're right. It could very well backfire on them and lead to quicker 
legalization of multi-partner marriage. But it could also cause state 
populations to say, "Well, if we *have* to recognize same-sex marriage in 
our constitutions, then we're at least going to define marriage in a way the 
prevents polyagamy. We're drawing a line in the sand. This far and no 
farther." That could very well set back the legalization of multi-partner 
marriage by decades.

It's a risk...

Kelly   
  It's already happening - many states have already revised their constitutions to specifically state that marriage is only allowed between ONE man and ONE woman.  We've been losing a lot of ground for quite a while now.  
   
  We have Stanley Kurtz to thank for that, he's the Harvard educated conservative think tank columnist who sounded the alarm, which religious extremists promptly latched onto and took to their state legislatures,that no rational argument against multi-partner marriage could be made once the legal definition of marriage is changed to permit same-sex partners to marry.  As I this I referenced here earlier today, as it happens I only this week posted that story (with pertinent references and links) to my blog.  If interested in knowing more, it's at:
   
  http://practicalpolyamory.blogspot.com/2007/07/polyamory-as-political-football-in-same.html
   
  Best,
  Anita





--------------------------
Practical Polyamory - http://www.practicalpolyamory.com

Blogging on polyamory relationship skills, the polyamory community/movement, polyamory activism, and, even occasionally, on my own lovely poly life, at http://practicalpolyamory.blogspot.com