Objecting to marriage control

Letters to the Portland editor, November 20, 2009
By PORTLAND PHOENIX LETTERS  |  November 18, 2009
“The Emperor is wearing no clothes” on both sides of the marriage war. In the latest battle, Maine’s “People’s Veto” of L.D. 1020, neither side was ever going to resolve anything. Indeed, the winning Yes side has not actually protected marriage. The losing No side was not going to actually protect marriage equality. However, a win-win solution proposed by consenting adult pro-polygamists can now free us all from both sides’ “naked” hypocrisy.

The anthropological and biblical definitions of marriage have always included polygamy. Hence, one-man/one-woman and same-sex marriage both re-define marriage.

One-man/one-woman proponents were the first ones to re-define marriage. Overlooking the Bible’s numerous polygamists, they based their re-definition on the Adam and Eve story and “one flesh” verse in the first two chapters of Genesis. Yet, author Moses was married to two wives — “one flesh” with each of them. Plus, Adam and Eve were never married by government. Indeed, government marriage never happened in the Bible. Even so, one-man/one-woman activists became the original marriage controllers to turn to big government, to re-define marriage, and to give themselves special rights.

Today, another re-definition has emerged: same-sex marriage. Previously, due to the anatomical impossibility of coitus between same-sex partners, marriage’s definition never included same-sex marriage. Now, however, by copying the same tactics of the one-man/one-woman marriage controllers before them, same-sex marriage activists have become the new marriage controllers to turn to big government, to re-define marriage, and to give themselves special rights too.

Supporters of marriage control by either form have a right to their imaginations — even though inaccurate. However, neither side has the right to re-define marriage or to receive special rights for those imaginations. New marriage control for same-sex marriage is as wrong as original marriage control for one-man/one-woman. It is still tyranny, discrimination, and hypocrisy.

First, marriage control does not protect marriage; it uses big government to control doctrine. But marriage is a God-given individual right, pre-dating government itself. Government is for protecting individual rights — not for majorities controlling doctrines. Hence, marriage control is as anti-freedom as Gospel control, Baptism control, and the Lord’s Table control (as well as Passover control or Ramadan control). If any majority tried to legally re-define and control these other doctrines, most religious one-man/one-woman supporters would be screaming, “Tyranny!”

Second, Maine’s defeated same-sex marriage law absolutely did not end discrimination. It did not protect marriage equality for all unrelated consenting adults. The specific law, L.D. 1020, re-wrote the “Prohibited marriages” statute, striking out Clause 5 (same-sex marriage), while leaving Clause 4 (polygamy) unchanged. The law arbitrarily discriminated a limit of “two people” — giving same-sex partners special treatment while expressly denying consenting adult polygamists. If this marriage control happened in reverse, same-sex marriage activists would be screaming, “Discrimination!”

Third, marriage control is based on hypocrisy. One-man/one-woman proponents say that children need a father and a mother. Same-sex marriage supporters say that children simply need two adults. Yet, in a society littered with abandoned single moms and marriage-phobic males, both sides ban consenting-adult polygamy — even though it more than answers both sides’ arguments. If Heather can have two mommies, why can’t she have two mommies and a daddy? Hypocrisy!

Telling the “naked emperor” on both sides to “get dressed,” consenting adult pro-polygamists propose a win-win solution out of all this hypocrisy. It’s limited government: abolish marriage control for unrelated consenting adults. Then marriage will never be re-defined by anyone. No one will have special rights. Whether same-sex marriage, one-man/one-woman, or consenting-adult polygamy, everyone will truly be free. Thereby, the marriage-control war ends and everyone wins. Freedom!

Mark Henkel
TruthBearer.org | NationalPolygamyAdvocate.com
Old Orchard Beach
Related: Play-by-play, Do it like we used to do, Numbers game, More more >
  Topics: Letters , Culture and Lifestyle, Special Interest Groups, Relationships,  More more >
| More


Most Popular
ARTICLES BY PORTLAND PHOENIX LETTERS
Share this entry with Delicious
  •   DONE WAITING FOR PATIENT SAFETY  |  March 07, 2013
    As an employee in downtown Portland as well as a resident, I've been exposed to a climate of escalating hostility surrounding the entrance to the Planned Parenthood of Northern New England offices.
  •   NOT BUYING THE MOSS LEGEND  |  January 30, 2013
    In the January 11 Portland Phoenix, book reviewer Charles Taylor lauds Kate Moss — the notoriously waifish model — as the "most extraordinary photographic muse of our era."
  •   BIRDS, NOISE VS. WIND POWER  |  December 31, 2012
    I was very disappointed that the Phoenix chose to endorse subsidizing the wind power industry.
  •   COURAGE IN JOURNALISM  |  November 28, 2012
    What does it mean to be a courageous journalist?
  •   AN ORGAN RECIPIENT SPEAKS UP  |  October 31, 2012
    An article on this subject ("On Being Undead," by Jeff Inglis, October 26) needs to be done with great thought and care.

 See all articles by: PORTLAND PHOENIX LETTERS