Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.
Post Office Box 1231 • Manassas, VA 20108 • (202) 216-9430 • Email: info@imapp.org


WWW iMAPP

Support iMAPP
Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Join the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy mailing list
Email:
Weekly Archives

Blogger!



Tuesday, February 01, 2005

SSM AND POLYGAMY: Gabriel Rosenberg

[More older links, but well worth your time. The posts include comments and trackbacks, so really, it's quite a bit of pure chewing satisfaction. --Eve]

part one: "I view the choice of partner as an integral part of the right to marry, but in the case of polygamy the state is not denying an individual this choice. Rather it requires that the individual choose. If Tim wants to marry Sally he is permitted to do so provided he first obtains a divorce from Sue." (more)

part two: "As I noted in the last post both polygamy and incest prohibitions deal with prohibiting marriage because of the presence of another kinship relation. In the polygamy case it is the marital relation of the individual to another spouse. In the incest case it is the already existing kinship relation between the prospective couple. I believe that the new relation (and even the possibility of such relation occuring) interferes with the already existing relation. I think this is what sociologists and anthropologists refer to as role conflict but I'm no sociologist. In any case, I will explain in more detail below about ways this conflict in roles creates problems. First, however, I will note that the legal marital roles used to be distinctly defined by gender. Likewise a person's role in society used to be legally defined by gender. Thus a huge conflict could have arisen from the preson of one gender taking on the legal role of another. That problem no longer occurs today for two reasons. In many states, including Massachusetts, the legal role of husband and wife is no longer distinct. A few laws on the books may be gendered, but in all likelihood such laws would be required to be read gender neutrally should they be challenged. Likewise, the legal role in society is no longer gender determined. I'm not saying there are no differences between men and women, but rather there are no legal rights or obligations in the commonwealth of Massachusetts that apply to only one sex. (At the Federal level a few remain. For example, men must register with selective service.)" (more)

part three: "Courts are used to thinking of things in gender-neutral terms, considering the individual and not the sex. Polygamy requires considering two (or more people) the same way you would consider one person." (more)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

home | marriagedebate.com | resources | about imapp | contact

Copyright Institute for Marriage and Public Policy