The following is a question to supporters of gay marriage, but first some context. In recent discussions about gay marriage, one phrase often used by the supporters has been "love is love". The idea being that marriage is (to supporters of gay marriage) primarily a decoration of love between two people, and the legal recognition of that fact.
My question therefore, in light of that fact, is as following:
If the only criteria for legal recognition of marriage is to do with romantic love, upon what basis would the state be able to prohibit legal recognition of polygamy or incestuous marriage?
In either of those two cases, I am sure that the participants involved would state that they have genuine romantic feelings. Is there any basis for preventing these people from also having their marriage recognised?
I believe those people should too be able to have their marriages recognized. It may seem taboo but gay relationships were once seen as taboo and look how far they have come.
Good to see consistency.
While I agree that yes, "love IS love" and do support gay marriage, I can see why in many countries/states marriage is not allowed between members of the same family. Before you all jump on me, please remember that I am not saying that I think this is morally RIGHT, just that I CAN SEE why governments may be hesitant to make this legal, and the reason is health of prospective children. In incestuous partnerships a resulting child is far more likely to suffer genetic abnormalities than a child whose parents were not related by bloodline. However, incest is a tricky subject that I don't particularly want to get involved in a heated discussion about as I am unsure where I stand on the issue, and because I do not want to judge anyone unjustly or criticise unfairly.
Yet we still prohibit incest in incidents of sterility.
That's presuming that legislation is rationally based and consistent.