Could polygamy be acceptable for the same reasons given for gay marriage?

You're absolutely correct. The argument for gay marriage - that is, "consenting adults" should be able to marry whoever they want - also favors polygamy, so long as everyone involved is over age 18 and of sound mind.

But it gets even more complicated: What if a man and woman (both over age 18) want to get married, but they happen to be brother and sister? Incest is currently illegal in all 50 states, but if the argument is only about "consenting adults", this would mean that incest should be allowed by law.

Crazy stuff, man.

"The fact is... once you change the legal definition of marriage as it has been understood for over 2000 years... anything is possible. The law has nothing to do with common sense or even reasonableness... that is how lawyers make a living.... if a marriage is a legal contract... between to parties... then no, but if it is a legal contract between consenting adults... then yes."

Where are you talking about that has had the same legal definition of marriage for 2000 years?

No. It is equally illegal for everyone, so there is no lack of civil rights for any group.

In a complex and interwoven society, it isn't enough to be consenting adult. You still can't engage in behavior that hurts the society. Polygamy creates an imbalance in the sexes that damages whole countries. We rose about that and became a successful country. We won't go backwards.

Polygamists have a long ways to go to show us they do no community damage. It took decades of activism for gays to get to this point. Polygamists haven't begun to fight politically, and they will find a stone wall of resistance when they do.

I don't know why polygamy is illegal, there is nothing in the Bible against it. As far as it benefiting society or not I don't know that either. But I do know that it's not a straw dog saying that if Marriage becomes legal between 2 members of the same sex it is extremely detrimental to society. The basic unit of society is Mother (Woman), Father (Man), and children. In the 60's Feminists claimed that it ditn't hurt the child if the Mother was away all day at work but now from recent studies we know that both parents staying together with one being a Man and 1 being a woman is necessary for proper psycho sexualy development in the person.

The fact is... once you change the legal definition of marriage as it has been understood for over 2000 years... anything is possible. The law has nothing to do with common sense or even reasonableness... that is how lawyers make a living.... if a marriage is a legal contract... between to parties... then no, but if it is a legal contract between consenting adults... then yes.

Nothing wrong with polygamy, as long as all the adults are consenting and happy with it.

PS. What "reasons" are you talking about? Basic human rights?

you're somewhat plenty off on your assumptions. First, you're assuming all married couples will desire to have childrens or will try inspite of frequent disadvantages. no longer all couples want childrens and a great style of go with to take steps to sidestep it; unrelated couples nonetheless have the threat for mentally undesirable infants, and a great style of nonetheless try besides even whilst a physician has stated them of frequent genetic disadvantages; and a appropriate couple might could desire to be residing in a backwoods cabin to no longer be attentive to the genetic disadvantages with the aid of reproducing jointly. 2d, with the point out of people marring their infants, if those infants are no longer yet grownup that's already prohibited with the aid of the regulations and with the aid of social rejection via fact of rejection of pedophilia and toddler marriage. 0.33, gay intercourse is not extra of a threat to unfold HIV/AIDS than heterosexual intercourse. If one person of a heterosexual couple is contaminated, he/she is rather plenty in threat of spreading it to an uninfected companion. an identical might decide for a gay couple. And merely the different, if the two companions of a heterosexual or gay couple are sparkling of HIV and different sexually transmitted illnesses, they have no threat of spreading illness. illnesses and infections will no longer be able to be created out of no longer something merely via fact a sexual partnership could be socially rejected. sooner or later, each and every of those issues you point out will could desire to stand or fail decrease than its own reward, unrelated to gay rights and same intercourse marriage equality. additionally, each and every of those issues consistently has existed and consistently will exist, autonomous of homosexuality. whether or no longer each and every is generally happening with the aid of society varies based on the social customs of the area and the era. Such arguments against same-intercourse marriage do no longer face as much as good judgment in any way.

No. But it's used as a Straw Man argument by angry anti-gay activists to prevent law-abiding, taxpaying, gay Americans from taking part in the American dream.

The court has problems with polygamy that aren't there with same sex marriage

such as property division if one or more partners leave... The court will never like it for that reason... IT CANNOT BE DIVIDED WITHOUT TAKING COPIOUS AMOUNTS OF COURT TIME.

and that's just how it is !

Sure - as long as fathers do not produce more children than the parents are able to provide for in all ways.