“You are resorting to scare tactics!”

“No one is arguing for the legal recognition of polygamous or polyamorous relationships as marriages!”

“Recognizing same-sex partnerships does not open the door to changing fundamental marital norms. It will not change the nature of marriage as a monogamous and exclusive union—-it will simply make marriage as we’ve always understood it available to more people.”

That was then; this is now. Have a look at the article by Jillian Keenan in the perfectly mainstream online magazine Slate :



The definition of marriage is plastic. Just like heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage, marriage between two consenting adults is not inherently more or less correct than marriage among three (or four, or six) consenting adults. Though polygamists are a minoritya tiny minority, in factfreedom has no value unless it extends to even the smallest and most marginalized groups among us. So lets fight for marriage equality until it extends to every same-sex couple in the United Statesand then lets keep fighting. Were not done yet.

I will be accepting “I have to admit it: You told me so, Robby” messages. (See here .) While I’m at it, I’ll hazard another prediction, though I’d love to be wrong: The Slate article will not produce a single serious critique by a major scholar or activist in the SSM movement arguing that marriage is not completely plastic, and identifying a principled ground for rejecting the legal redefinition of marriage to include multiple-partner sexual relationships.