Why Gay Marriage is a Bad Idea: Part 3 - Polygamy

So far in this series, I have asked radical animal rights activists what they think about marrying animals and I have criticized comparisons made between gays and pedophiles.

This week, I'll be taking a look at Rick Santorum's very "Christian" view of polygamy and marriage as a whole.

It seems Rick likes to talk about this a lot to dodge the gay marriage debate. Either this is the case, or he's using a logical fallacy as a "good demonstration" to prove he's "within reason". Normally people who are within reason don't have to prove themselves, right?

Polygamy

I'm sure a few of you will remember this discussion from back in January. While on a visit to a New Hampshire college, Rick was asked how he justifies his beliefs with regards to gay marriage. As usual, he turned to polygamy to build his argument against same-sex marriage.

Rick Santorum is Christian, so he follows the Bible - the word of God - and therefore believes the Bible. Now I have nothing against religion, just against bigots. Rick uses religion to fight against gay rights. Ironically though, he says that God created marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

"Ironically? What do you mean Patrick? That's true isn't it?"

Well, not really. Now, I'm neither for nor against polygamy, so I'm going to just analyze what the republicans are saying, seeing as Mitt Romney strangely gives a very similar answer when confronted with a question on gay marriage.

Let's start off by taking a look at the definition of polygamy. According to dictionary.com, polygamy is:

1. the practice or condition of having more than one spouse, especially wife, at one time.

(Source)

The republicans say that marriage is clearly defined in the Bible as "a union between one man and one woman". Well I wonder which parts of the Bible they decided to skip, because there are quite a few polygamous relationships in the scriptures? Sure the Bible also says monogamy is the way to go, but how did that end up winning over polygamy? They just ignored it, right?

Interestingly, the Bible focuses mainly on polygyny, or one man having multiple wives. Shows you what some of them make of women (as proven by the Texans recently)! Polyandry (one woman having more than one husband) seems to be brushed under the carpet in the Bible, almost as if women could never possibly be on an equal footing with men.

But back to our Christian republicans using polygamy as a negative example. According to the very comprehensive Wikipedia page on polygamy in Christianity:

Many of the Old Testament Prophets and Patriarchs had multiple wives, including Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah and Jehoiada. Some interpretations also suggest Moses had a second wife in Tharbis. Other polygamists identified in the Bible include Abijah of Judah, Ashur, Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Esau, Ezra, Gideon, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Rehoboam, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah.

(Source)

Yep, every single one of those links is a name of a Prophet or Patriarch in the Old Testament who was in a polygamous relationship. This is where we start to see the irony in their arguments. They are saying that God created marriage between one man and one woman, yet here, in the Old Testament, we can clearly see that there are many, many, polygamous and polyamourous relationships. So is Rick Santorum going against the Bible in saying that the Bible defines it as a union between a man and a woman? I'll let you decide.

Why should we sanction happiness? (S)

Another point Santorum makes in that video - and often makes on TV - is that gay marriages are a dis-service to society because they don't bear children. Well then in that case, marriage between two old-age people should be illegal, and when a couple can no longer produce children, their marriage should be taken away from them. This is not a view I have, it's just following the logic that Santorum is using.

Why should we sanction happiness? If consenting adults think that by marrying the person they love, they'll be happy, then I believe they should have the right to do that. Personally I don't think polygamy is a bad idea in this respect, but the issues arise, for me, when it comes to children, inheritance, visitation rights etc. I don't think there is enough evidence yet to suggest whether it's feasible or not.

Want me to tackle a particular anti gay-marriage argument in next week's post? Leave a comment below or tweet me @FRWPatrick.