The Right to Polygamy?

The Right to Polygamy?

That legalization of or especially creating a constitutional right to same-sex marriage will lead to a constitutional right to polygamy is a favorite “scare tactic” of social conservatives.  But Slate's Jillian Keenan argues, with a good deal of sense, that nobody should be afraid of legalized polygamy:


All marriages deserve access to the support and resources they need to build happy, healthy lives, regardless of how many partners are involved. Arguments about whether a woman’s consensual sexual and romantic choices are “healthy” should have no bearing on the legal process. And while polygamy remains illegal, women who choose this lifestyle don’t have access to the protections and benefits that legal marriage provides.

As a feminist, it’s easy and intuitive to support women who choose education, independence, and careers. It’s not as intuitive to support women who choose values and lifestyles that seem outdated or even sexist, but those women deserve our respect just as much as any others. It’s condescending, not supportive, to minimize them as mere “victims” without considering the possibility that some of them have simply made a different choice.

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.

Here are the key points:

Most of the pathologies we currently associate with polygamy come from polygamists operating in secret and outside the law.  If polygamy were legal, it would be far easier to deal with the various forms of abuse.

Legal polygamy would make it clear that, like any other human relationship, it must be consensual.  That means, of course, no child brides and all that.

Many polygamists live decent and responsible lives.  They should have equal access to the various social services and other resources that support families.

The Supreme Court has said that women have the right to define their own identities, the mystery of their own existences.  The same, of course, goes for gays.  Respect for the relational choice of polygamy is part of the autonomy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

It’s “condescending, not supportive” to think of women who choose polygamy as “victims.” We should regard their choice as “different”—and not inferior.  It’s not a violation of anyone’s rights. Polygamists so far—being mainly dissident Mormons—are social conservatives who raise their children with traditional values.  But polygamists wouldn’t necessarily stay that way, and people have the right to raise their children as they please.  Polygamy (and polyandry) might be really compatible with a kind a feminist personal independence.  And studies show that children are happier who are raised in large families with the presence of lots of caring adults.

We think marriage is “plastic.”  It evolves.  It evolves, as our Court says, in the direction of liberty.  Our opposition to polygamy isn’t “necessary and proper,” but a Christian prejudice.  Declaring the choice of polygamy as a constitutional right would be very hard on the Mormons, but that’s their (religious) problem.

Our understanding of “equality” leads in the direction of inclusiveness.  Isn’t this the next step in “marriage equality?”  The takeaway:  Don’t be scared into dissing polygamists just to humor social conservatives.  Legalized polygamy won’t be any big deal, and it won’t weaken anyone else’s marriage. 

I don’t mean this to be ironic in some “modest proposal” sense.  For one thing, it’s not my proposal.  I do mean it to be a kind of thought experiment about the evolving American idea of liberty.

Archaeologists identify contents of ancient Mayan drug containers

Scientists use new methods to discover what's inside drug containers used by ancient Mayan people.

A Muna-type paneled flask with distinctive serrated-edge decoration from AD 750-900.

Credit: WSU
Surprising Science
  • Archaeologists used new methods to identify contents of Mayan drug containers.
  • They were able to discover a non-tobacco plant that was mixed in by the smoking Mayans.
  • The approach promises to open up new frontiers in the knowledge of substances ancient people consumed.
Keep reading Show less

The strange case of the dead-but-not-dead Tibetan monks

For some reason, the bodies of deceased monks stay "fresh" for a long time.

Credit: MICHEL/Adobe Stock
Surprising Science
  • The bodies of some Tibetan monks remain "fresh" after what appears to be their death.
  • Their fellow monks say they're not dead yet but in a deep, final meditative state called "thukdam."
  • Science has not found any evidence of lingering EEG activity after death in thukdam monks.
Keep reading Show less

What do Olympic gymnasts and star-forming clouds have in common?

When Olympic athletes perform dazzling feats of athletic prowess, they are using the same principles of physics that gave birth to stars and planets.

Credit: sportpoint via Adobe Stock
13-8
  • Much of the beauty of gymnastics comes from the physics principle called the conservation of angular momentum.
  • Conservation of angular momentum tells us that when a spinning object changes how its matter is distributed, it changes its rate of spin.
  • Conservation of angular momentum links the formation of planets in star-forming clouds to the beauty of a gymnast's spinning dismount from the uneven bars.
Keep reading Show less
Culture & Religion

Of spies and wars: the secret history of tea

How the British obsession with tea triggered wars, led to bizarre espionage, and changed the world — many times.

Quantcast