> No amount of pedantic quibbling will allow you to escape the fact that poly-marriage is defined by the TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE in the marriage
Obviously.
> it doesn't matter how many partners an individual prefers, the only question is the number of people, not WHO THEY ARE.
I should think that peoples' preferences and drives for partnering and sex does in part define who they are.
> it's akin to saying "speeding laws target people who like to speed" which is obviously true but misses the point that the law is based on your actual speed not on your personal predilection for speeding; it's not discrimination because it's not about you.
It's a prohibition against specific conduct, much like the now defunct prohibition against homosexual sex. One should not stop at the law itself; one must examine the law's effect on those negatively impacted vs everyone else.
Obviously.
> it doesn't matter how many partners an individual prefers, the only question is the number of people, not WHO THEY ARE.
I should think that peoples' preferences and drives for partnering and sex does in part define who they are.
> it's akin to saying "speeding laws target people who like to speed" which is obviously true but misses the point that the law is based on your actual speed not on your personal predilection for speeding; it's not discrimination because it's not about you.
It's a prohibition against specific conduct, much like the now defunct prohibition against homosexual sex. One should not stop at the law itself; one must examine the law's effect on those negatively impacted vs everyone else.