# Anti-SSM argument goes from stupid to... what the heck is this?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [April 10, 2014, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819 "2014-04-10T19:53:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 5
### Author:  [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/81 "2014-04-10T22:51:31Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> I don’t care one whit about homosexual activity. It is not about that. It is about the meaning and nature of marriage. Homosexuals \*do \*have the right to marry. Hasn’t anyone noticed? The only restriction is that I has to be someone of the \*opposite \*sex, because that’s what marriage is.
Although you seem hungry, I feel no desire to feed you.
---
### Author:  [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/82 "2014-04-10T22:56:42Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#):
>
> Isn’t your backing for this the idea that for 40,000 years people have used it to mean one thing?
>
> So it’s not unassailable, by your basis. All you’d need is 40,000 years of people using it to mean something else.
Could we get the same result from 40,000 people using it for a year?
---
### Author:  [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/83 "2014-04-10T22:57:03Z")
> [@silenus](#):
>
> You, too? I bet we don’t even get a toaster.
Read the fine print! Not only do we not get a toaster, but we are required to buy a new one, regardless of whether we already have one! And it has to a be a special gay pink one!
Thanks a lot Obamacare…
FYI, anyone else getting nostalgic by **Melchior’s** “ghost of SDMB past” arguments? Haven’t seen those old chestnuts in like two years or so, at least.
---
### Author:  [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/84 "2014-04-10T23:00:43Z")
It would appear that Melchior’s [anti](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17272814&postcount=18)-[bicyclist (and runner)](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17273132&postcount=35) stance wasn’t getting enough traction so s/he decided to try an anti-SSM stance instead.
---
### Author:  [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/85 "2014-04-10T23:41:26Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> No, it is the _meaning of the word_, which is unassailable.
Hmm. Maybe it is [assailable.](http://www.bing.com/search?q=marriage+defination&pc=MOZI&form=MOZSBR)
Dictionaries contain the “meaning of words,” right?
> [@](#):
>
> ```
> mar·riage
> [márrij]
>
> ```
>
> [ul]
> [li]legal relationship between spouses: a legally recognized relationship, established by a civil or religious ceremony, between two people who intend to live together as sexual and domestic partners[/li][li] specific marriage relationship: a married relationship between two people, or a somebody’s relationship with his or her spouse[/li][li] joining in wedlock: the joining together in wedlock of two people[/li][/ul]
---
### Author:  [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/86 "2014-04-11T00:01:54Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> What supports all laws regarding marriage? Custom and only custom. If you throw this out, then laws against bigamy or marrying your sister or a dog will be subject to the same process, for their foundation is no different. You can’t have it both ways. Does the passage of time in itself invalidate any law? What about laws against murder?
Are you unaware of how many cultures have permitted multiple spouses in the past? Or that there are cultures in the modern world with the same custom?
Legal incest has typically been reserved for royalty (Egypt, Hawaii) and since we don’t have royals here that’s not an issue.
I’m also totally OK to restricting marriage to those within the same species (at least until intelligent space aliens show up, at which point we can revisited the issue).
You see, I’m not afraid of change, or of two adults declaring their love for each other. Unlike some people.
---
### Author:  [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/87 "2014-04-11T00:05:59Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> 40,000 years of human history means less than a judge acting alone?
Who the hell knows what marriage was 40,000 years ago, or if it even existed back then?
Again - you seem woefully ignorant that other societies have had and some still have different marriage structures than we do.
---
### Author:  [@Blackberry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blackberry)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/88 "2014-04-11T00:14:47Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> No, it isn’t. SSM is being forced upon the many by the few through idiotic misinterpretations of law by lunatic judges.
Here in WA it was forced on us by me and the other 1,659,914 people who voted for it 🙂
---
### Author:  [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/89 "2014-04-11T00:19:37Z")
> [@Blackberry](#):
>
> Here in WA it was forced on us by me and the other 1,659,914 people who voted for it 🙂
Maine and Washington also voted in SSM. And of course, promptly forced all heterosexual people into same-sex marriages, right?😛
---
### Author:  [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/90 "2014-04-11T00:24:11Z")
Now with chain-quoting! Because I realized too late this was already on page two!
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> Historically, marriage was for property and inheritance and preserving lineages.
Really? Hunter-gatherers had property and inheritance? Since when?
And marriage customs have as often been about preventing in-breeding within a lineage by forcing marriages outside a lineage/clan.
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> We are talking about the last few years here. Besides, there are numerous laws governing marriage and divorce that rest on no different foundation: laws regarding adultery, bigamy, etc. have no firmer foundation than custom. Can I not claim that it is unfair to forbid me from marrying someone simply because she is married to someone else?
Yep, you can certainly claim that. In fact, there are still nations where it is perfectly legal for you to have more than one wife at a time. In areas where the custom is derived from Islam you’d be limited to four and you have to treat them equally, but if you want old-style as many as you’d like and treat them as you wish look to Africa. It was even legal in Utah well into the 19th Century.
And lets not leave the ladies out! Tibet and Nepal, along with neighboring areas of China and northern India have a long tradition of poly_andry_, which is multiple husbands for one woman. In North America both Aleuts and Inuits practiced polyandry, some groups more than others.
So, sure, you can claim it’s unfair all you want. I don’t think there’s the popular support for polygamy in the US to get the laws change but you don’t know until you try, right?
---
### Author:  [@Motorgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Motorgirl)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/91 "2014-04-11T00:38:04Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#):
>
> Maine and Washington also voted in SSM. And of course, promptly forced all heterosexual people into same-sex marriages, right?😛
Here in MA too. My husband and I are opposite-sex married so we have to pay a fine on our state taxes. We get a 30% discount on the fine though because we’re also polygamously married to our cat, who is male, so at least two of us are same-sex married as decreed by law.
---
### Author:  [@Blackberry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blackberry)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/92 "2014-04-11T00:40:18Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#):
>
> Maine and Washington also voted in SSM. And of course, promptly forced all heterosexual people into same-sex marriages, right?😛
Ooh, sore subject. I mean, Joan is great, it’s just that I didn’t want to get married at all. But, the law’s the law. Although to be honest I’m kind of dreading the inevitable next step of us all being forced to marry dogs. This is a pretty small apartment.
---
### Author:  [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/93 "2014-04-11T00:45:00Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> We are talking about the last few years here. Besides, there are numerous laws governing marriage and divorce that rest on no different foundation: laws regarding adultery, bigamy, etc. have no firmer foundation than custom. Can I not claim that it is unfair to forbid me from marrying someone simply because she is married to someone else?
You realize that polygamy was commonly practiced for most of the time interval you mention (especially among the rich) and is still practiced today in many civilized countries.
I don’t think we have laws about adultery any more. You mad about that also?
And narrow minded people being forced to confront the fact that not everyone is like them is hardly the reason for laws.
---
### Author:  [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/94 "2014-04-11T00:45:31Z")
> [@Blackberry](#):
>
> Ooh, sore subject. I mean, Joan is great, it’s just that I didn’t want to get married at all. But, the law’s the law. Although to be honest I’m kind of dreading the inevitable next step of us all being forced to marry dogs. This is a pretty small apartment.
Personally I’m most worried about having to marry close family members. I mean, once they can force into SSM it’s just a slippery slope!
---
### Author:  [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/95 "2014-04-11T00:46:00Z")
> [@Blackberry](#):
>
> I’m kind of dreading the inevitable next step of us all being forced to marry dogs. This is a pretty small apartment.
That will seem easy compared to the step after that, when you’re forced to marry a dog who is also your sister. Think of the genetic engineering that will be required. If you think GMO crops are a big controversy, just wait.
---
### Author:  [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/96 "2014-04-11T00:47:33Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> Oh? Don’t dogs have rights? Ask the animal rights activists, your kind of people.
Well, wait. If even dogs have rights (as you make perfectly clear here), then I certainly have the right to marry any dog who consents to marry me. And certainly, _people_ have at least as much rights as dogs. So we must all have the right to marry any person who consents to that marriage in return.
Do you believe that person/dog marriages should only be allowed for heterosexual person/dog couples, or do you accept SSM person/dog marriages too? (Think of the children!)
---
### Author:  [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/97 "2014-04-11T00:50:48Z")
**Melchior** must be one hellacious skier, what with all the slippery slopes in his neighborhood.
---
### Author:  [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/98 "2014-04-11T00:53:00Z")
> [@Motorgirl](#):
>
> Here in MA too. My husband and I are opposite-sex married so we have to pay a fine on our state taxes. We get a 30% discount on the fine though because we’re also polygamously married to our cat, who is male, so at least two of us are same-sex married as decreed by law.
Curse you Mitt Romney! 😛
The mods should sticky this thread, since it contains just about every lame-o argument against SSM in one convenient place.
---
### Author:  [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/99 "2014-04-11T01:50:21Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#):
>
> Is it too late for me to trade in my parents? I ask because my father is dead, and I wouldn’t mind having two parents again. 😃
Well, you can, but being dead is really going to hurt his blue book value.
---
### Author:  [@urban1a](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/urban1a)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/100 "2014-04-11T02:13:53Z")
> [@Heart\_of\_Dorkness](#):
>
> Well, you see, if we “redefine” marriage from “a societal, legal, and personal compact between _a man and a woman_” to “a societal, legal, and personal compact between _two people_”, then the children of man-woman marriages will be traumatized when they realize that this means their parents are, in fact, people. Or something.
>
> I mean, honestly. There’s more logic in the premise that "ya got trouble with a capital ‘T’, and that rhymes with ‘P’, which stands for ‘[pool](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_Oe-jtgdI)’
Thank you. One of the best links in a long time, and quite appropriate.
Bob
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=4)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=6)