BIG LOVE ... OR BIG MESS?
 But it's not like gay marriage
 
By Deborah Leavy
Philadelphia Daily News
 
CONSERVATIVES like syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer are shaking the bars of their cages, ranting that a TV show featuring a polygamous family proves that they were right all along - that if gay marriage gained acceptance, polygamy would be next.

"With the sweetly titled HBO series 'Big Love,' polygamy comes out of the closet," fulminates Krauthammer.

Though having one man married to three women does add a twist to this comic soap opera, the show is hardly an advertisement for this particular alternative lifestyle.

"First wife" Barb seems to be the show's most sensible character, until you consider she was crazy enough to let her husband marry two other women. When Barb and her husband want to see each other more than the third of the time they're allowed, they have to "cheat" on the others and worry about being caught!

I wouldn't want to share my husband with anyone, but certainly not with second wife nasty Nicolette, who has secretly run up $60,000 in credit-card debt. We have enough trouble managing a joint account with just two people.

And then there's Margene, wife No. 3, who used to be the baby sitter - a common fantasy for some men. Now that she's married, poor Margene is stuck with the children of all three wives!

Hubby Bill works his tail off to maintain three homes, one for each wife, and pops Viagra daily to keep up with their sexual demands. No, "Big Love" isn't likely to lead anyone into polygamy. But what about gay marriage?

Conservatives argue that if we permit a change in gender in the historical definition of marriage - between one man and one woman - the logical next step on the slippery slope would be to change the number from one to who knows how many. Or even, as Rick Santorum famously noted, from man to beast.

Indeed, some polygamists are trying to climb onto the gay marriage bandwagon. "Polygamy is the next civil-rights battle," asserts Mark Henkel, founder of Truthbearer.org, which calls itself a Christian evangelical polygamy organization. (On his Web site, he is known as Mark the Founder - please pass the Kool-Aid.)

Gay activists don't like being in bed with polygamists, who aren't too happy about it either. While polygamists find it convenient to use the gay-rights argument, they are often religious conservatives who believe homosexuality is sinful.

Both homosexuality and polygamy have been present throughout history, although not always accepted by society. The most important distinction between the two is that homosexuality is genetically determined - polygamy is a choice.

And there are social policy differences as well. Legitimizing gay marriage stabilizes relationships and society. It is a legal construct based on equality and narrows the number of sexual partnerships of people who are homosexual. Conservative rhetoric notwithstanding, gay marriage poses no threat to heterosexual families, whose existence won't be devalued by the availability of gay marriage.

Polygamy does destabilize relationships and society. It presents legal complications to the marriage contract that may be insurmountable. And it increases the number of sexual partnerships within families, threatening other families by legitimizing that choice while ignoring a basic human emotion - jealousy.

A competing social policy favors keeping government out of people's private sexual and contractual arrangements.

Personally, it doesn't much bother me if consenting adults have unconventional relationships. But we can have gay marriage without making polygamy the next Big Love.

Deborah Leavy is a public policy consultant who often works on civil-liberties issues. E-mail her at deborah.opinion@gmail.com.
 
philly.com
Originally published Monday, May 8, 2006
 
Back