Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Where are you getting 10+% from?

For a long time homosexuals liked to claim that at least 10% of the population is homosexual. That is what I suspect you are quoting. However that claim doesn't have good support. But figures that I have seen peg the rate of people who are primarily homosexual much lower than that. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Demographics for some random figures. From that list the number I would quote for the USA is 4%.

However if you look at it differently, much more than 10% of the population cares. According to polls almost half the electorate thinks that gays should be allowed to marry. And a lot of non-homosexuals agree that the issue is important. So supporters of gay marriage aren't limited to gays.

My personal feeling is that consenting adults should be allowed to enter into any consensual arrangement that they wish. Therefore I am fully in support of allowing both gay marriage and polygamy, even though I have no desire to engage in either lifestyle. I should be clear on this. My position on polygamy doesn't come from my position gay marriage. They both come from more fundamental beliefs. But I suspect that as more people become familiar with the idea of polygamy as they have with the idea of gay marriage, that there will be a growing acceptance of it. And as an example of this I'd offer the changing opinions in Canada. First gay marriage became accepted, and now polygamy is becoming accepted.

So while logically polygamy doesn't flow from gay marriage, I think that the opponents of gay marriage are correct that acceptance of gay marriage is a step towards the likely future acceptance of polygamy.



10+% is my horseback guess for how many people really care, not the % of gay people. If it were larger the argument would be over already, I think.

Marriage goes far beyond a contract or power of attorney; for example, spouses have Fifth amendment protection. As you said it depends on where people finally agree to move the line to. I personally suspect that a "strong formulation" of gay marriage would be the most stable.

Denying one group rights because you fear what some other group might want is dishonest even if the premise is true. Giving former slaves rights made society more likely to give women those same rights, and all the same crap arguments were used then, too.

All of that is academic anyway. Rights are not given, they are demanded. Once polygamists constitute a significant constituency they can fend for themselves. Otherwise, leave 'em out of the equation.


I am straight, but I would be pissed of at discrimination of homosexuals.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: