Minnesota Catholic Conference proposes that bisexuals want to marry one of each

[Diva667]

http://minnesotaindependent.com/89065/minnesota-catholic-conference-claims-bisexuals-want-to-marry-both


From the article:


“It’s about preserving an important institution,” Adkins told PIM. “When you’re talking about marriage and changing the definition of marriage, you’re not creating a separate institution called same-sex marriage. You’re in fact redefining marriage for everyone.”

Adkins added that legalizing marriage for same-sex couples would create a slippery slope. “There’s little reason why you’d limit it to two people at all. What if a bisexual wants a partner of each kind, a man and a woman? Are you leaving that group out?”

These people have a problem with logic and the law. Not to mention that they are pearl clutchers on an epic scale. So what if a bi person wants to marry one of each? It seems to me that heterosexuals have already done a better job of destroying the institution of marriage than anyone in the LGBT ever thought of doing.

[NeonSwing]

Well said Diva!

I'm reminded of a line from the movie 'What Happens in Vegas' by a character played by Dennis Leary.

Taylor.

[darkeyes]

.. actually to be fair there are those in the bisexual community who would wish just such marriages.. but there are those in both the gay and straight communties and I would think the trans community who wish that also... in all four communities they are very few compared to the whole, almost miniscule in number, so it is a bit of a red herring is it not and easily fended off?

[Diva667]

.. actually to be fair there are those in the bisexual community who would wish just such marriages.. but there are those in both the gay and straight communties and I would think the trans community who wish that also... in all four communities they are very few compared to the whole, almost miniscule in number, so it is a bit of a red herring is it not and easily fended off?

And members of the straight community who wish multiple partners as well. In fact there are religions who allow and encourage multiple spouses. Again not many, but enough to raise the issue.

If all involved are of consenting age, who is hurt?

Is it so much worse than the way we do it now? At the moment we divorce and remarry so many times it isn't even funny.

[Long Duck Dong]

And members of the straight community who wish multiple partners as well. In fact there are religions who allow and encourage multiple spouses. Again not many, but enough to raise the issue.

If all involved are of consenting age, who is hurt?

Is it so much worse than the way we do it now? At the moment we divorce and remarry so many times it isn't even funny.

I agree... why limit it to bisexuals, why can we not have non bisexuals, have the right to poly marriage ????

I am a monogamous natured person myself, but I know and understand that my ways are not the ways of others, and I would love to see others have the rights to poly marriage, the same as myself, even if I would not use it......

the only issue I see, is where one person wants poly marriage and the other partner doesn't, there is a almost automatic accusation that the monogamous natured person is wrong.....

thats the thing with marriage, its US, not me and I, and thats why so many marriages fail, they are a on going compromise where both people have to give and take, and that is something that many people do not want to do... as they see it as a infringement of their rights......and the other persons fault

[ohbimale]

I am one of those bisexuals who would choose to marry one of each sex.

The whole issue of marriage and to whom is not just moral or religious. A lot of it is control plus legal defiinitions of inheritenance and the division of marital assets upon divorce or death. This was the reason the catholic church decided their priests should not marry...they were tired of fighting with family members in court over who got the assets when priests died.

It is a simple and complex problem all wrapped up in one package.

[lizard-lix]

Maybe it is jut my fantasy.. (or totally normal for poly folks)

I have long thought that an MMFF foursome would be the ideal partnership, (big) IF you could find the compatible loving people.

Everyone could get a bit of everything and there is always backup for those times when someone just wants time out..

Seems natural to me

And great comment Diva, yep, we'd have to work awfully hard to screw it up any worse than the straights have!

[JP1986UM]

.. actually to be fair there are those in the bisexual community who would wish just such marriages.. but there are those in both the gay and straight communties and I would think the trans community who wish that also... in all four communities they are very few compared to the whole, almost miniscule in number, so it is a bit of a red herring is it not and easily fended off?

I am one of them

the wife is keen to have me get a long term male companion who would one day move in with us

the labor of running a home would be alleviated, the issues of income and being able to cope in a down economy become a lot easier in some ways

straight couples have been fucking up marriage for so long, its actually serial monogamy and I've never been a fan of monogamy, I think it sucks

so to have a husband....yes
so to have a wife?........yes

is it any of their business?

fuck no

[BiDaveDtown]

.. actually to be fair there are those in the bisexual community who would wish just such marriages.. but there are those in both the gay and straight communties and I would think the trans community who wish that also... in all four communities they are very few compared to the whole, almost miniscule in number, so it is a bit of a red herring is it not and easily fended off?

I agree.

I am married to my wife. I don't want another marriage to anyone at all.

There are very few people no matter what their sexuality is who even want a group "marriage".

I've met people who did attempt a "marriage" or "relationship" between multiple people and they don't last or work out at all.

The Catholic church is fucked up.

I'm glad I am no longer Catholic and I left them long ago.

[12voltman59]

Typical "straw man" scare tactics that arrogant leaders use to scare an ignorant portion of the populace who are afraid of anything they don't have experience with or is not in the realm of "the way things are supposed to be."

I know that "gay marriage" really frightens this sort---hell----some of them are still afraid about whites and blacks being able to marry----there are even a few of the Teavangelicals in a few states that actually, at least, are on record publicly stating that they would once again make it illegal for blacks and whites to marry--same for the all the other possible combinations of "other races" being allowed to marry.

Of course--we have to preserve the "purity" of the white race and also have to preserve and protect the "sanctity of marriage" between one man and one woman (pure heterosexuals only!!!)

[tenni]

This argument was used by the Catholic Church and other Christians in Canada as a rationale not to give equality rights based upon discrimination of a minority by the majority. The focus is on one group (heterosexuals) at the expense of denying equality to those who are not of that sexuality. Such positions ignore or reject that sexuality is a basis requiring equal treatment under the law and constitution just as race was denied as deserving of equal treatment under the law and constitution. If your constitution permits discrimination you may want to change your constitution to clarify equality and what that constitutes. If your constitution does not permit discrimination then it will be shown eventually in the courts. The question may be does it permit discrimination as to prevent equal protection and equal benefit of the law for minorities.

Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Canadian constitution

"Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."

As far as numbers of individuals in a marriage that also is a matter of understanding whether this discriminates and prevents equal protection and equal benefit of the law. Recently , the Canadian Supreme Court has struck down laws that were found to be "arbitrary" and "grossly disporportionate". This may put into risk any law that may be found to be based on political or moral beliefs rather than facts.

From today's Globe and Mail.

"As for polygamy laws, Charter challengers face the somewhat different task of showing that the purported arbitrariness of the law has backfired. They will need to proffer research that documents corrosive effects the law visits on polygamous family units, as well as harm that social castigation has on family members.

Prof. Mathen said the polygamy law has an Achilles heel – its arbitrary targeting of relationships based solely on the number of people in them. This amounts to discrimination against a lifestyle choice based on nothing more than moral distaste, she said. The law is also vulnerable because instead of going after “harmful” polygamous relationships, he said, it catches every polygamous relationship in the same net."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-politics/landmark-insite-decision-threatens-peace-between-judges-and-legislators/article2196941/page2/

[darkeyes]

I agree.

I am married to my wife. I don't want another marriage to anyone at all.

There are very few people no matter what their sexuality is who even want a group "marriage".

I've met people who did attempt a "marriage" or "relationship" between multiple people and they don't last or work out at all.

The Catholic church is fucked up.

I'm glad I am no longer Catholic and I left them long ago.

Do you really???

Actually sweets, I am not opposed to the idea of polygomous marriage being accepted legally... most people probably wont want it, but some do.. in my view keeping it illegal is an infringement of their human right to live peacefully as they wish in the lifestyle they would prefer...

..and polygomous marriages may not work out.. that is always possible.. people within that marriage type will always leave and divorce from it individually or collectively. Monogomous marriage isnt exactly a great example to hold up with divorce rates and marital breakdowns as they are..

[elian]

Typical "straw man" scare tactics that arrogant leaders use to scare an ignorant portion of the populace who are afraid of anything they don't have experience with or is not in the realm of "the way things are supposed to be."

I know that "gay marriage" really frightens this sort---hell----some of them are still afraid about whites and blacks being able to marry----there are even a few of the Teavangelicals in a few states that actually, at least, are on record publicly stating that they would once again make it illegal for blacks and whites to marry--same for the all the other possible combinations of "other races" being allowed to marry.

Of course--we have to preserve the "purity" of the white race and also have to preserve and protect the "sanctity of marriage" between one man and one woman (pure heterosexuals only!!!)

That reminds me of a line from the movie Bulworth which I thought was a really great movie despite some rough edges..I think the last 10 seconds of this clip would be my answer to the promotion of "racial purity".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8lUY9jS8oQ

NOTICE: Parental Advisory - Explicit Lyrics! - (if your children are laughing IT'S NOT OUR FAULT!)

For those of you without high speed - "We'll all just have to keep screwing until there IS no white or black anymore"..then maybe they'll have less to worry about..

Guess that isn't the classiest response I've ever given but these people with their "purity of the race" crap drive me nuts..it's already been proven that 98% of DNA is genetically identical..so they are talking about banishing people, shaming and killing people for like 1/10th of one percent genetic difference.. All I can say is THANK GOD those people were BORN with the "RIGHT" skin color!! <gruimble grumble sarcasm>

Coincidently, although it is a work of fiction - "The Help" is one of the best movies I have seen come out of Hollywood in a while.

[LastGent]

Just so you know, Nancy Kress in "One Million A.D." predicts that a million years from now the only legal marriage the government will recognize will be between a female and two of her clones. So the debate you're having now is a waste of time.

[void()]

Sure, I would like to marry elian also. He compliments my wife well. I love them both. Sometimes want to sleep with a guy, other times sleep with a gal. She has no problem. He has no problem. Society has the problem.

[_Joe_]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_lm2JI7sGwYI/TQmdLnKeDwI/AAAAAAAALvw/jNppXumCr58/s1600/sanctity+of+marriage.jpg

[Diva667]

http://oneclassybroad.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/storyimages_1306791134_samesex.jpg

[darkeyes]

http://oneclassybroad.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/storyimages_1306791134_samesex.jpg

I don't very much like the point this little ad seems to make.. or am I reading it wrong, Diva?

[MarieDelta]

I don't very much like the point this little ad seems to make.. or am I reading it wrong, Diva?

More states currently allow you to marry your (opposite sex) first cousin than allow you to marry your same sex partner. That's the point.

People want to make all sorts of accusations about how same sex marriage is going to destroy the "institiution of marriage", but it seems to me that if it were going to be "destroyed' it would have happened long ago.

If you were thinking I was insinuating something about our southern states- you'd be wrong.

[Long Duck Dong]

More states currently allow you to marry your (opposite sex) first cousin than allow you to marry your same sex partner. That's the point.

People want to make all sorts of accusations about how same sex marriage is going to destroy the "institiution of marriage", but it seems to me that if it were going to be "destroyed' it would have happened long ago.

If you were thinking I was insinuating something about our southern states- you'd be wrong.

based around the marriage stats of the different countries, marie, and the drop in marriage rates, I think we can safety say that its heteros that are destroying the value of marriage, as they are the only ones that had the ability to marry...lol..... and get divorced......

LGBT marriage... and poly marriage if its ever legal.... may save the decline in marriages.... tho i do doubt it.... I am seeing more and more people say its easier just to live together and love, without a expensive piece of paper to prove it..... cos in NZ, a couple living together and a married couple have the same rights, benefits, etc etc... its just that one couple face a 2 years seperation period and a shit load of lawyers fees when things turn to shit

[darkeyes]

More states currently allow you to marry your (opposite sex) first cousin than allow you to marry your same sex partner. That's the point.

People want to make all sorts of accusations about how same sex marriage is going to destroy the "institiution of marriage", but it seems to me that if it were going to be "destroyed' it would have happened long ago.

If you were thinking I was insinuating something about our southern states- you'd be wrong.

Not the southern states specifically, but the concept of marriage berween cousins, coming as I do from a country which is part of a continent where it is both legal and historically not unheard of.. there does seem to my eyes at least, to be a bit of a dig at states who do not allow same sex marriage yet do allow marriage between close kin...