Monday, August 9, 2021

Marriage Equality Amendment

I once found this blog where someone was proposing a "Marriage Equality Amendment.”

The simple text of the proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation.

We are definitely in favor of lifting restrictions that prevent someone from marrying someone of the same gender. But this amendment would still leave on the books numerous laws that prevent full marriage equality. The people on whose behalf I am blogging would not only still be prevented from having their marriages recognized, but many could be imprisoned for openly living as married. Prejudice against one is prejudice against all.

A better wording for the amendment would be:
The right to marry or to personal consortium shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, ancestry, consanguinity, affinity, or number of participants.

Haven’t we progressed to this point? Why prevent consenting adults from loving each other?

[This entry bumped up because it is as relevant as ever.]
— — —


  1. An even better proposal, albeit a bit more progressive (i.e. unrealistic in the current political environment) would be for the government to relinquish any and all power over the definition of marriage, making it an agreement between only the people involved and having no legal trappings defining it. Any joint ownership of goods or child custody could be handled privately via contract in the instance of divorce.

    1. Agree. Personal relationships are not the business of the state.

      In fact, the government issuance of marriage licenses has some pretty racist origins.

  2. Agreed, tangentbot - the federal gov't has no business being involved with marriage at all beyond ruling on matters of judicial civil contracts that warrant a federal ruling, which would likely amount to none...

    Churches should "marry" or accept "marriages" as they see fit, people can call themselves "married" if they want. There shouldn't be any special tax benefits or exclusive privileges for hetero-marriages.

    How long it will be before a poly or adult consensual incest cases appears by virtue of the same arguments which found Prop 8 unconstitutional & is dismissed by the same reasoning established by SCOTUS's traditional federal standing rules.

    Unfortunately today's rulings do little to secure marriage as a civil right for all.

  3. The Volokh Conspiracy commentary relevant to the CA Supreme Court's decision impact on a constitutional right to polygamy:

  4. Very interesting material!

    If you like this, perhaps you will like this upcoming conference. (Feb 21-23, 2014). It is entitled: "The Future of Monogamy and Nonmonogamy," and is followed by a meeting of political activists who are interested in advance to cause of marriages and/or domestic partnerships etc that include more than two people:

  5. "Haven’t we progressed to this point?"
    Uh, you live in a world where about 15 countries recognise same-sex marriage, and a number of them issue death penalty for it, so I think that answers it.
    Heh, 'progress', that's an empty word if I ever heard one, much like 'good' and 'evil'. It carries similar tones as well. I'd avoid using it in any serious context.

    1. I have to admit I was writing mostly from the perspective of the
      US, Canada, Australia, and Western Europe.

  6. Last year, New York ruled that an uncle-and-niece couple could get married. As far as I know, New York is presently the only US state where marriage between piblings and chiblings is allowed, even though it's legal many European countries, as well as elsewhere in the world.

    1. Mark, thanks for all of your contributions.

    2. No problems. I figured it was worth mentioning since it's a relatively recent development and so isn't reflected yet on the Final Manifesto map.

  7. In my humble opinion the variable of jealousy unfortunately cannot be removed from the equation. I've seen numerous groups of people attempt this ideology or life choice. Invariably jealously rears it's ugly head and the notion of a singular all loving cohesive unit is unraveled from within.

    A house divided cannot stand. I think the concept is beautiful on paper. Similar to communism, unfortunately I have yet to see a real world example of an actual success story. I'm certain not implying or stating that there are in fact success stories.

    I have personally witnessed several times men in particular alleging that they are Poly. When in fact they were trolling for casual sex. It's rampant in the groups I've seen.

    One of the best definitions of intimacy I've heard was from Robin Williams character in Good Will Hunting. "Let me save you the suspense kid. This girl you met she isn't perfect and you're not perfect either. The question is are you perfect for each other? That's intimacy, that's the whole deal.

    I don't understand how something that pure between two people can be distributed amongst several more people in an equitable meaningful manner. One of my dearest friends has been misled, used and traumatized by men bearing false witness. Unfortunately they used the guise of Polyamory to get her to drop her guard and these men had sex with her until it was no longer appealing and dumped her. Obviously this problem is not exclusive to your community. However the tenants or convention of your community are taylor made for men to pimp with impunity.

    For all you success stories out there. Good for you! Keep doing what your doing. If someone would be so gracious as to explain to me how an entire group of people are capable of being perfectly content with the collective and completely eliminate jealousy. Please explain it to me.

    I sincerely don't understand how one can make it work. I'm trying to understand. In no way am I attempting to be punitive or combative. I'm genuinely curious sociologicaly.

    People always fear what they don't understand. I can only base my opinion on what I've personally witnessed.

    One final observation the vast majority of poly folks I've crossed paths with are vehemently anti monogamy and have an us against them mentality. There are truly are open minded people outside your sect. I'm just trying to actually bear witness to a successful group in love. I've heard lots of lore and rhetoric. I've never seen a pure example of intimacy amongst three or more people. Please share your stories with me. Perhaps I'm the Cretan and you're the enlightened.

    Above all I have to believe that this nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal will once again as President Lincoln stated again experience a new birth of freedom.

    Good luck to you guys. I look forward to hearing your testimonials!

  8. there has to be a church and government separation law.


To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE. If your comment includes graphic descriptions of activity involving minors, it's not going to get published.