View Single Post
Old 11-22-2004, 11:56 AM   #60 (permalink)
smooth
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
thank you publius.

and aliali, I support polygamists marrying--and I've stated this before. And before you throw out another non sequiter, I also think statutory "rape" laws should be revamped.

I also don't have any pressing issues against cousins marrying, if you must know my position on that. I think it's even legal already in some states.


EDIT: Here is my original post on the topic:

Quote:
First of all, I already urged deeper study on incest.

The research I have read points to incest taboos primarily being a function of ensuring the stability of the nuclear family, not genetic issues.

In support of my contention, I would submit that incest taboos have been around millenia longer than understanding of genetic disorders, and that incest rarely results in visible genetic disorders (while not addressing whether dormant genes may reside in the offspring). Incest does not result in a high probability of genetic disorders and it certainly does not result in a high probability of visual disorders (which would be most important if we are tracing the function of incest taboos in pre-contemporary times and civilizations.

Rather, incest taboos preserve the hierarchy within nuclear families. For example, in a nuclear family that still functions in some way "in the wild" (say, living together on a farm or gathering fruits; as opposed to in urban dwellings that have less need for a familial hierarchy given the mobility of spouses and offspring), if a husband/father is sleeping simultaneously with mother and daughter, that present a fundamental authority challenge to the mother. It may even preclude the brother from a 'natural' place in the family (given that we are most likely speaking about a patriarchal society). If a brother is sleeping with the mother, that presents a fundamental authority challenge to the father (who for all intents and purposes of this example is otherwise considered the head of household--HoH; gotta love media!). Furthermore, we can also understand that a brother sleeping with a sister would present an unteneble problem to the father who would otherwise use his daughter to form closer kinship ties with distant clans.


In summation, incest taboos function to maintain hierarchy within nuclear families and relate more to kinship ties with outside clans than genetic issues.


It can be argued that incest taboos do threaten the familiar order, but possibly less so in urban and high mobility areas than previous eras and economic structures.



I don't see how polygamy threatens the current social order, and I do not support it being prohibited. I also don't agree that the majority of cases involve underage or brainwashed girls (additaionlly, the latter issue of whether brainwashing is even a true phenomenon is contested in the most current social journals).

I think you have a good point that it ought not to be written out of the discussion, except for the fact that I don't think the people opposed to homosexual marriage on religious grounds would support the legalization of polygamy--so that presents a conundrum to you.

I don't know what I think regarding sex with animals. On one level, we could argue that it does not affect society and certainly people are entitled to engage in personal behaviors in their homes. However, one could argue from an ethical perspective that animals are non-consenting actors, unless it could be established that they are consenting to the acts somehow. And one could further argue that animals ought to have indidividual rights to be protected, as well.


Yet, none of that is relevant to the discussion as laid out by boatin because he does not ask what the analogies are, he specifically states that the arguments are similar between homosexual marriage opposition and interracial marriages. He wants to know how you see the two differently--not whether you see incest, polygamy, or bestiality as relevant or not. As such, those issues are red herrings to his question.

He may concede that they ought to be legal, or ought not to be. We don't know and it doesn't quite matter in the manner in which he framed his question.
from here: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...light=polygamy
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Last edited by smooth; 11-22-2004 at 12:00 PM..
smooth is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360