Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
July 24, 2015
Right on schedule, the New York Times has published an op-ed saying that now that gay marriage is legal, we need to work on legalizing polygamy.
With same-sex marriage on the books, we can now ask whether polyamorous relationships should be next.
There is a very good argument that they should. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell did not focus primarily on the issue of sexual orientation. Instead, its main focus was on a “fundamental right to marry” — a right that he said could not be limited to rigid historical definitions or left to the legislative process. That right was about autonomy and fulfillment, about child rearing and the social order. By those lights, groups of adults who have profound polyamorous attachments and wish to build families and join the community have a strong claim to a right to marry.
The author notes that patriarchy should be a concern, but that this can be remedied by making it clear that it is not only men who are allowed to marry multiple women – women can marry multiple men as well.
Gender equality is of course a serious concern. But the arguments above rest on the assumption that plural marriage will involve only one man and multiple women. That assumption is weak. Plural relationships could well be (and in some circles today are) between multiple people of both sexes, not all of whom are strictly heterosexual.
True, most past episodes of plural marriage have been patriarchal. But the lesson of the same-sex marriage case is that we should not be too wedded to historical assumptions. It was not that long ago that many people held vicious stereotypes about same-sex relationships that led them to wrongly assume that gay people were unfit for marriage. We should not make the same mistake in assuming we know what plural marriages in the future would be like.
Incestuous couples, pedophiles and dog-f**kers are reportedly “outraged” that polygamists have pushed their way to the front of the line to ride the slippery slope.
