With the polygamy case in British Columbia, there has been a lot in the media about polygamy. It is certainly good copy, a real-life Big Love. Our lead editorial in the January issue noted that in an age of same-sex ‘marriage’ it was only a matter of time until plural marriage became legal. If the gender doesn’t matter, why then should the number? As we state:
The point is not that same-sex marriage ineluctably leads to polygamy; rather, the point is that if there is no valid argument against the definition of marriage as being between two people of different genders, there can be no argument against marriage existing between more than two people. When the courts accepted the arguments for same-sex “marriage,” they made opposition to polygamy all but impossible: the equity provisions of the Charter could be wielded against any type of perceived restriction remaining in the legal definition of marriage.
In 2005 I was in North Bay speaking to a pro-family rally against SSM and the organizer and I were interviewed by local media. One of the reporters, a lesbian, took exception to our warning that polygamy would be a political and legal issue within 3-5 years if same-sex marriage was permitted and a legally permissible reality within a decade. She said we were fear-mongering and that one had nothing to do with the other. In some sense, she’s right, but as we note in our editorial, once the logic behind the priviledging of traditional marriage is denied, there is no ground on which to defend any limits on marriage whatsoever.
