Federal judge upholds same-sex marriage ban in Louisiana

I think one arguement against it is that while finally people are seeing being gay as how you're born, being poly is considered a choice. And if you have a legalized marriage, then a man who works for ABC company has three wives, his comapany would have to pay insurance for all of them.

I'm not familar enough with poly to render an informed opion, so I'd like to hear more about it. I know one family that lives in a poly fedelity marraige. However, I don't want to hold them up as an example of others as I didn't think their relationship was healthy. They lived in a way that the husband was in "Charge" and whatever decision was made, that was it. We knew their son because one of my daughters knew him. If he was over my house, he had to ask his mom if he could stay for dinner and then she would have to ask the husband and the answer was no until it was yes.

The 2nd wife was very timid who they described as being very damaged and they took in. She ended up leaving to go back with her parents and the police actually escorted her to get her things. And before that there was another 2nd wife who was also "Damaged" (This according to the poly couple) that they helped and she turned her backs on them.

It just seemed to me that they were taking in women who were low in confidence and skills and had other issues on purpose. But as I said, I don't believe that represents most poly families.

Zoombie said:

Once, someone said, "If you support gay marriage, what about between a man and his dog!?"

I responded by saying, "It depends on how intelligent the dog is."

Click to expand...

My dog is too smart to take up with the likes of me.

Vince524 said:

I think one arguement against it is that while finally people are seeing being gay as how you're born, being poly is considered a choice.

Click to expand...

Just focusing on this point, Vince, because it's interesting. I wonder how much of a real distinction that is, I can see a guy saying, "I genuinely love these two women and want to be with them forever, and it's not natural to me to be with just one person."

I also proffer this article by Jillian Keenan which I think relates because she talks about what "sexual orientation" might mean. Her argument is that being kinky is a orientation, not just an assortment of practices.

Honestly, I'm not sold on the theory but as I said, it's interesting.

Vince524 said:

I think one arguement against it is that while finally people are seeing being gay as how you're born, being poly is considered a choice.

Click to expand...

Another form of marriage that was once illegal and is purely a matter of choice is mixed race marriage. So "choice in the matter" should not be a huge factor.

And if you have a legalized marriage, then a man who works for ABC company has three wives, his comapany would have to pay insurance for all of them.

Click to expand...

It's troubling that "what an employer may have to pay for" gets any consideration at all in this question. I can't marry all the men I love because it's not fair to my employer? And what if I'm self-employed? Or my cadre of hot young husbands have their own insurance coverage? Or my employer simply makes it a policy to cover no more than one spouse per employee?

I bring this up because in the Michigan fight against gay marriage the plight of those poor, helpless employers who will be forced to cover the insurance of same sex spouses gets brought up now and again. It's as if the government believes its most important citizens are corporations, and that the highest moral value is saving a buck that will fall to the bottom line for shareholders.

Vince524 said:

I think one arguement against it is that while finally people are seeing being gay as how you're born, being poly is considered a choice.

Click to expand...

Markesq said:

Just focusing on this point, Vince, because it's interesting. I wonder how much of a real distinction that is, I can see a guy saying, "I genuinely love these two women and want to be with them forever, and it's not natural to me to be with just one person."

Click to expand...

An interesting point. Remember how I mentioned that close family members of mine were poly? I sometimes have wondered if my own feelings on love are somehow hereditary. In my earliest memories, I was far too young to understand poly. But I do remember how I played with my "I Love My Little Ponies."

I had them all divided into Mommy, Daddy, and baby sets (this meant I had to pretend some "female" ponies were "male," but whatever.) Then I lost one of my Mommies. It seemed really sad for the "family." So after a while, when I gave up on finding the Mommy, I bought a new one. It wasn't long after that I found the first Mommy, and hence was presented with a moral dilemma.

To my five-year-old mind, the only thing that made sense was because the Daddy loved both Mommies and the Mommies both loved the baby was for them to be a family, and all love each other. After that, almost all my toys became poly in one way or another, simply because that's how love works, the way I see it. Love encompasses. It builds networks. Jealousy, to me, is a product of insecurity and distrust - and those things don't belong in a proper loving relationship.

I genuinely love to see someone I love holding hands and being romantic with another person whom I also love... no jealousy or incriminations needed. I don't see why breaking the promise to be sexually faithful is any worse than breaking other promises (but I do hold promises and honestly sacred.) But other people act like infidelity is a good reason for divorce. How is infidelity that different or worse?

Does this mean I was born to be poly, even if I've lived monogamously with my husband for over a decade? I will say that while I can be monogamous, it feels... less complete. I have a loneliness in me that cannot be filled completely by one love, no matter how outstanding. If I could be openly, happily poly without society's bullshit, I would be.

And if you have a legalized marriage, then a man who works for ABC company has three wives, his comapany would have to pay insurance for all of them.

Click to expand...

"Each employee may choose one other adult for coverage." Done.

I'm not familar enough with poly to render an informed opion, so I'd like to hear more about it. I know one family that lives in a poly fedelity marraige. However, I don't want to hold them up as an example of others as I didn't think their relationship was healthy. They lived in a way that the husband was in "Charge" and whatever decision was made, that was it. We knew their son because one of my daughters knew him. If he was over my house, he had to ask his mom if he could stay for dinner and then she would have to ask the husband and the answer was no until it was yes.

The 2nd wife was very timid who they described as being very damaged and they took in. She ended up leaving to go back with her parents and the police actually escorted her to get her things. And before that there was another 2nd wife who was also "Damaged" (This according to the poly couple) that they helped and she turned her backs on them.

It just seemed to me that they were taking in women who were low in confidence and skills and had other issues on purpose. But as I said, I don't believe that represents most poly families.

Click to expand...

From the outside, it's hard to judge any relationship, but keep in mind that a relationship is what the people involved agree it should be. Some women may prefer to leave decisions to the husband. Some of those "broken" women may have grown and been strengthened through this relationship, even if it didn't end up working out. Even if it ended badly.

The poly relationships I see around me are different than what you describe - but then, each one is different from each other, too. They are as different as the people involved in them.

MarkEsq said:

I also proffer this article by Jillian Keenan which I think relates because she talks about what "sexual orientation" might mean. Her argument is that being kinky is a orientation, not just an assortment of practices.

Honestly, I'm not sold on the theory but as I said, it's interesting.

Click to expand...

I see being kinky as an innate part of my sexual it on a similar level as my bisexuality. Not quite, but close. I was aware of being kinky before I was aware of being bisexual.

I wouldn't say that being kinky is as big a part of my identity as a person, though, because it's something that's mostly limited to certain nonpublic parts of my life. I don't feel like what I do with my partners is anyone's business, but the genders of my partners and who I'm attracted to are basic facts.

I do feel like kinky people comparing their orientations can be appropriative sometimes, particularly because the BDSM community is largely straight and can have some heteronormative or fetishistic attitudes sometimes (I don't really feel comfortable navigating the larger community as a genderqueer person, and I think trans women can have it tougher).

Monkey said:

I genuinely love to see someone I love holding hands and being romantic with another person whom I also love... no jealousy or incriminations needed. I don't see why breaking the promise to be sexually faithful is any worse than breaking other promises (but I do hold promises and honestly sacred.) But other people act like infidelity is a good reason for divorce. How is infidelity that different or worse?

Click to expand...

*shrug* You feel one way. Someone who is naturally monogamous has different priorities. I also think the way our laws surrounding marriage and divorce work, our stupid misogynistic society, and the current spread of STDs create some unique fears surrounding infidelity.

Monkey said:

I genuinely love to see someone I love holding hands and being romantic with another person whom I also love... no jealousy or incriminations needed. I don't see why breaking the promise to be sexually faithful is any worse than breaking other promises (but I do hold promises and honestly sacred.) But other people act like infidelity is a good reason for divorce. How is infidelity that different or worse?

Click to expand...

Because being unfaithful and being poly isn't the same thing Monkey, as you should know since you yourself are poly. In a true poly relationship all parties know the score, and all are fine with the score. Polyfidelity exists, and what the parties involved consider fidelity differs according to the relationship. My gf is poly, but I'm not. We have an understanding that if she wanted to be with someone else in addition to me or bring someone else into our relationship (I personally would be more comfortable with a true triad etc situation), she will discuss it with me first. I don't have veto power or anything of the sort, but I have the power to walk away from what we have if she is with someone else and keeps me in the dark thinking I am the only person she is with.

She's been faithful to me the entire time we've been together, and I would still consider her faithful if she came to me wanting bring someone in or be with someone else in addition to me on her own. But only if she told me, and didn't go behind my back. In the entire time we've been together she's never been interested enough in another person to bring up a triad or her dating another person with me. I didn't even know for the first half year we were together that she is poly. But what we have works for us, and that's what matters.

heza said:

*shrug* You feel one way. Someone who is naturally monogamous has different priorities.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much the crux of what I was saying. I don't think I'm naturally monogamous. I've told my husband that for years, though I have never cheated. I've told my mom that. I can't swear that poly is something you are born with, but I feel like it was for me, if that makes sense.

I also think the way our laws surrounding marriage and divorce work, our stupid misogynistic society, and the current spread of STDs create some unique fears surrounding infidelity.

Click to expand...

Marriage is, first and foremost, an agreement between consenting adults. It is also a contract recognized by the state, but contracts often involve more than two parties. Divorce is adjudicated by a court, and I'm sure they can figure it out. Misogyny and STD's shouldn't stop poly relationships any more than any other, and is it really "infidelity" if they are keeping their word, being honest, and not breaking their vows?

Keep in mind that I'm thinking specifically of committed, long-term relationships that happen to be between more than 2 people, but aren't necessarily engaging in risky behavior otherwise.

heza said:

*shrug* You feel one way. Someone who is naturally monogamous has different priorities. I also think the way our laws surrounding marriage and divorce work, our stupid misogynistic society, and the current spread of STDs create some unique fears surrounding infidelity.

Click to expand...

And people tend to conflate poly with infidelity, when that isn't the case at all. People can be in a completely committed triad relationship with two other people, where nobody involved goes outside the relationship for dating and sex. People can also be in two or more separate romantic attachments where they're not with anyone else besides those specific people. Polyfidelity exists and it's deffinition is almost as varied as poly relationships are, but it is real.

Lillith1991 said:

Because being unfaithful and being poly isn't the same thing Monkey, as you should know since you yourself are poly. In a true poly relationship all parties know the score, and all are fine with the score. Polyfidelity exists, and what the parties involved consider fidelity differs according to the relationship.

Click to expand...

Oh, no, you misunderstand, and re-reading, I can definitely see why. Sorry about that. I believe 100% in polyfidelity and in complete disclosure. But because of that, even in a poly relationship, infidelity can still happen. People can still lie and sneak and cheat (I have no idea why the would, but they could.) My point was that, why would going behind your partner's or partners' back(s) to sleep with someone else be considered so much worse than going behind their back to do something else? Why is lying about sex worse than lying about something else?

To me, the crime is the dishonesty, not the sex. And this ties in to why I feel like I'm naturally poly, because it in no way seems "extra" offensive to me that the dishonesty was tied into sex. It doesn't seem like an "extra" betrayal. The sex, in itself, seems like a natural impulse that people have, especially when they are emotionally close with someone else. The lying is a huge problem. That it's about sex seems beside the point.

She's been faithful to me the entire time we've been together, and I would still consider her faithful if she came to me wanting bring someone in or be with someone else in addition to me on her own. But only if she told me, and didn't go behind my back.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's the "going behind the back" thing that is the problem. And if a partner is doing that, whether its for sex or something else, then there is a problem in the relationship. (Unless they're going behind your back to make a nice surprise party for you. )

But what we have works for us, and that's what matters.

Click to expand...

I wish everyone could just agree that this should be the law of the land, regarding consenting adults.

Monkey said:

To me, the crime is the dishonesty, not the sex. And this ties in to why I feel like I'm naturally poly, because it in no way seems "extra" offensive to me that the dishonesty was tied into sex. It doesn't seem like an "extra" betrayal. The sex, in itself, seems like a natural impulse that people have, especially when they are emotionally close with someone else. The lying is a huge problem. That it's about sex seems beside the point.

Click to expand...

Except, of course, not everyone has the same attitudes about sex. It can be made very clear by one member in a relationship that if you sleep with someone else, the relationship is over.

Now maybe you really want to sleep with someone else. But you also love your S/O, and don't want to hurt her or him. And you certainly don't want to end the relationship -- which may well include kids.

So yu have to make a choice -- suppress your desires and take no action on them, end the relationship, or lie.

The first can be very difficult. The second can be unthinkable. The third can be disastrous.

But really, it's hard to say, "just don't lie to me" when telling the truth will mean the end of the relationship.

rugcat said:

Except, of course, not everyone has the same attitudes about sex. It can be made very clear by one member in a relationship that if you sleep with someone else, the relationship is over.

Now maybe you really want to sleep with someone else. But you also love your S/O, and don't want to hurt her or him. And you certainly don't want to end the relationship -- which may well include kids.

So yu have to make a choice -- suppress your desires and take no action on them, end the relationship, or lie.

The first can be very difficult. The second can be unthinkable. The third can be disastrous.

But really, it's hard to say, "just don't lie to me" when telling the truth will mean the end of the relationship.

Click to expand...

Everyone has their deal-breaker. Someone who I love dearly but who suffers mental illness recently threatened to kill me. Deal breaker. I'm sorry, I cannot and will not tolerate that.

I think the difference between the way I see things and the way a lot of people do is that I can't imagine why sex (in itself- lying about it aside) should be a deal breaker.

But also, this goes back to relationships being what people agree that they are. For someone like me, it's probably not a good idea to marry someone for whom sex with someone else, in itself, is an automatic deal breaker. On the other hand, even feeling as I do, I have refrained and would refrain from sex rather than breaking my agreements regarding sex. I am willing to abide by my husband's wishes in order to remain married to such an amazing man. Well, honestly, I know he'd stay married to me even if I went against his wishes regarding sex. I am willing to abide by his wishes simply to keep him happy. Yanno. Because I love him.

"Deal breakers" need to be set from the outset and followed unless renegotiated. I do understand that. I just don't get why so many draw that line at sex. If it's about fear of losing the other person, emotional infidelity is surely worse, isn't it? And if it's about fear of losing the other person, how does severing the relationship fix that?

Is it about possession? It can't be about the need to be the only one someone loves, because surely they are allowed to love their family, their children, ect? And we all understand that you can love more than one person individually, completely, and yet in the same way at the same time, because we all see that in families where there are multiple children. We know that one child is no less special or cherished, and has no less of a parent's heart just because another child enters the family... why should one romantic partner feel any less when another enters in?

Monkey said:

Is it about possession? It can't be about the need to be the only one someone loves, because surely they are allowed to love their family, their children, ect? And we all understand that you can love more than one person individually, completely, and yet in the same way at the same time, because we all see that in families where there are multiple children. We know that one child is no less special or cherished, and has no less of a parent's heart just because another child enters the family... why should one romantic partner feel any less when another enters in?

Click to expand...

No, it's about the kind of love. Monogamous people naturally prefer to be the only one in their lover's bed and in their heart romantically. Familial love and romtanic love aren't the same thing, at least for me that is. Even some poly people prefer to be one of a select group of partners sometimes, and are upset when one of their partners goes outside the group.

If another person is legitimately becoming a part of an established relationship that is different. But if someone cheats and trys to cover their tracks then trust is broken, and that hurts the person who's trust has been broken. It shows a lack of respect for the person's partner(s) that some can't get over.

Monkey said:

I think the difference between the way I see things and the way a lot of people do is that I can't imagine why sex (in itself- lying about it aside) should be a deal breaker.

Click to expand...

I don't either. But people are different. I don't think it's a matter of it should or shouldn't be a dealbreaker– it just either is or isn't depending on who you are.

I have been on both ends of situations involving other romantic relationships. Seriously annoyed would be the best way I could describe my own reaction to what I considered bad behavior. But for me it not only was depending on what kind of relationship I had, but what kind of person my partner was "cheating" with. I mean, really, him?

But I think the fear of losing someone is often justified. It is certainly possible (for some people ) to be with someone they care about deeply and yet find themselves in love with someone else, or having a crush on them, or whatever you want to call it.

Sometimes it's a fling; sometimes it's a serious threat to a relationship. Sometimes the original couple breaks up and a new couple is them formed. Sexual intimacy can produce strong emotions and it truly can be risky behavior if you're trying to keep a relationship together. And that very real possibility can produce those feelings of impending loss and desperation, which are not ideal for any relationship.

Of course, that's just for you young folks. I'm quite settled these days. I would like to believe I've become older and wiser with age, but in truth I think it's probably just that my testosterone levels are now lower. I used to know better, but sometimes was driven by hormones to do things I shouldn't anyway.

Now, not only do I know better, but I just don't have the time nor energy for that kind of drama anymore.

Monkey said:

Divorce is adjudicated by a court, and I'm sure they can figure it out. Misogyny and STD's shouldn't stop poly relationships any more than any other, and is it really "infidelity" if they are keeping their word, being honest, and not breaking their vows?

Click to expand...

Lillith1991 said:

And people tend to conflate poly with infidelity, when that isn't the case at all. People can be in a completely committed triad relationship with two other people, where nobody involved goes outside the relationship for dating and sex.

Click to expand...

D'oh! I need to clarify. I wasn't making any arguments against poly or trying to conflate poly with infidelity. I should have made that clearer.

I was only trying to give a possible answer to this question:

Monkey said:

But other people act like infidelity is a good reason for divorce. How is infidelity that different or worse?

Click to expand...

Sorry if I caused any confusion, there.

SomethingOrOther said:

But personally I think all marriage is weird. Why not casually copulate while in heat as you please and mate freely with dozens of other humans? It ensures more genetic diversity and better survival chances in the event that calamity strikes your grazing fields.

Click to expand...

Except that we've structured things to make it really, really difficult for women to mate with dozens of other humans and then simultaneously rear and provide for their offspring without consistent help from the fathers.

Yeah, I'm all for having at least two adults working in tandem to raise children. One more reason why we should encourage stable, loving adult relationships, and encourage adoption in those couples who want children but are unable to bear them on their own for whatever reason.

Rugcat said:

Sexual intimacy can produce strong emotions and it truly can be risky behavior if you're trying to keep a relationship together. And that very real possibility can produce those feelings of impending loss and desperation, which are not ideal for any relationship.

Click to expand...

Producing strong emotions isn't a problem and doesn't produce this sense that, eventually, one or the other will be chosen and the other given up, if what you are looking for is polyfidelity and everyone cares for everyone involved.

But that's if that's what you have agreed to. If only one person wants a poly relationship, or if one person is cheating, then yeah, it can definitely be a problem.

You know, I think that might be kind of the missing link, here. People think of poly as in "she has an extra and he has an extra" or "he has three lovers" or whatever, but they don't realize that in a good poly relationship, *everyone* loves *everyone,* even those who aren't actively intimate with each other. There's a reason for the term "sister wives." There's a reason why I've seen two straight poly men who shared loves mistaken for lovers, themselves. Yes, it makes things more complicated when before anyone can be brought in, everyone must care deeply for them... but it means that when trouble arises, everyone has a stake in making things right and making things work.

ETA: Also, the focus, here, has been on sex. But just like any other romantic relationship, while the sex is definitely a part of it, the entire relationship is not defined by what happens under the sheets. A relationship is shared experience and circumstance, commiseration and building one another up, day-in/day-out little moments of kindness or understanding. It's about dinner conversation and sharing hobbies and the life you build together. I think it's a little crude, when discussing gay marriage, to get overly focused on the sexual part of it, or whether or not they can procreate, because a marriage is so much more than that. So, SO much more. The same is true in polyfidelity relationships. Even those who are not directly intimate with one another live their lives together, work together to establish a harmonious household, do each other those small kindnesses that make relationships work. There is sex between some members and not between others, but there is love all the way around.

Meanwhile, Judge Posner of the 7th Circuit delivers some sick burns during oral argument and a thoughtful opinion striking down the same-sex marriage bans in Indiana and Wisconsin. The opinion was 3-0.

[The] government thinks that straight couples tend to be sexually irresponsible, producing unwanted children by the carload, and so must be pressured (in the form of government encouragement of marriage through a combination of sticks and carrots) to marry, but that gay couples, unable as they are to produce children wanted or unwanted, are model parents—model citizens really—so have no need for marriage.

...

Heterosexuals get drunk and pregnant, producing unwanted children; their reward is to be allowed to marry. Homosexual couples do not produce unwanted children; their reward is to be denied the right to marry. Go figure.

Click to expand...

Opinion:
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b...4/C:14-2526:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1412339:S:0

Slate articles with audio clips:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/...s_witty_moral_and_brilliant.html?wpsrc=fol_tw

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/...r_destroy_arguments_against_gay_marriage.html

I feel we've definitely reached a tipping point. The vast majority of courts have found no reasonable legal grounds on which to ban gay marriage, and quite a few have been rather scathing regarding the arguments presented against it (for good reason!) Gay marriage is now federally recognized, and state after state has either decided to recognize it or had bans overturned. Louisiana is the only real outlier, here, and I'm sure that this court's decision will be overturned - not only because it is wrong, and not only because it flies in the face of what every other court has determined on this matter, but because the judge's "logic" is so obviously flawed and full of holes just on the face of it that it inspires outright contempt.

I am sure gay marriage will be legal across the United States very soon. But that's still not soon enough. This should have been handled already.

I actually has a blazing row the other day with one of my aunts (whom I usually adore). She's a very devout Christian and is usually pretty cool with her views etc. But I overheard her talking to another friend about gay marriage and how, while she has not issue with gay people, she didn't think they should be allowed to get married or have children. There were also some comments about 'all those gay priests abusing kids' which tipped my trigger finger.

Needless to say, after I screamed at her for three hours she was suitably educated enough to know why what she said was wrong. She's spent the last few days reevaluating her stance and has actually called me a couple of times to aske questions and get some insight, which I really loved because it showed that she LISTENED to what I said and considered it. I backed everything I said up with logic and had the knowledge to head her off on the whole 'God says it's wrong' thing (seriously, if I had a pound for every time someone tried to use the Bible against me in THAT argument I would be a fucking millionaire) because I'm a pretty devout Christian too, and I certainly know the Bible well enough to argue my points.

I personally think that marriage is something between two (or three or four or whatever) people who love each other. They are making a commitment to love and support and be with each other and beyond that, it's no one else's business.

People say things like how same sex marriage is against christianty etc, and how marriage is something sacred under God etc. But if we look at that from the outside, are those people then saying that non-christians who are are married are not really married? Are they refusing to acknowledge that union? It's a slippery slope.

Personally I love a wedding. I love seeing someone I love and care about commit and love someone else. It's a wonderful thing to be cherished. I don't give a shit how many penises are involved.