Quote Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
Here's the problem, we're talking about LOVE here.
Not really . . . lots of people get married for reasons other than love.

We're talking about legal recognition of relationships here. The thought occurred to me a while ago that people might substitute a marriage relationship for a partnership to avoid taxes or to prevent a business partner from testifying against him in court. Or something else, who knows . . .
All I'm saying here is that polygamous marriage laws could be used by criminals to avoid legal problems, and I haven't given the issue much thought. I will say, however, that if a way can be found to ensure that marriage laws for polygamists are not abused for criminal or commercial purposes, sure, I'd be in favor of 'em. Why not, as long as eligibility requirements were the same as for monogamous marriages?







If we are going to allow gays these rights based on their right to love and happiness we can't deny anyone else that right
The right to marry is based on Constitutional rights, and has nothing whatsoever to do with "the right to love and happiness."
Then again, the Constitution does not address each and every right we are entitled to; it only addresses the relatively short list of rights that our Federal government guarantees. For instance, US citizens have the right to paint our toilets purple. The US Constitution does not address that issue. the 14th Amendment says, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."




"






If the argument is "love is what is important" than it has to be of the same importance across the board.
Love is important--to people. But, it's irrelevant to the law. Whether or not 2 people love each other makes no legal difference.