From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May  7 11:22:12 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4C61737B401; Wed,  7 May 2003 11:22:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (Haldjas.folklore.ee [193.40.6.121])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2F85543FBD; Wed,  7 May 2003 11:22:11 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee)
Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by haldjas.folklore.ee (8.12.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h47IMA6U080107;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 21:22:10 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee)
Received: from localhost (narvi@localhost)h47ILZ0g080097;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 21:22:10 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 21:21:35 +0300 (EEST)
From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee>
To: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20030506233728.07e23528@popserver.sfu.ca>
Message-ID: <20030507211948.Y40030-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org>
cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Senator Santorum
X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Non technical items related to the community
	<freebsd-chat.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat>,
	<mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-chat>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat>,
	<mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 18:22:12 -0000


On Tue, 6 May 2003, Colin Percival wrote:

> At 12:29 06/05/2003 -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> >On Tue, 6 May 2003, Colin Percival wrote:
> > >    Not quite.  Bigamy and polygamy aren't questions of sex; they're
> > > questions of marriage.
> >
> >They are also crimes in the US, which is the point he's making. Actually,
> >you're supporting my argument, even if you don't realize it. :) If we
> >decide that removing the laws against sodomy is ok because you have the
> >right to do whatever you want behind closed doors, then the laws against
> >the other things he mentioned should be removed too, for the same reason
> >(see below for one important qualification).
>
>    Bigamy isn't something which goes on behind closed doors.  Marriage is a
> matter of public record; someone who is only a bigamist behind closed doors
> is no more than an adulterer.
>

No, he need not be. He might be a polyamorist. After all, its not adultry
if the other half of the marriage knows and agrees to it, unless you take
some odd defintion of adultry.

>
> Colin Percival
>