If a man is lusting for something, by what principle can we deny him a marital imprimatur for it? By what standard? All that is necessary for my argument is that it could entail this, and whether or not it did would be entirely up to the lusts of the person concerned. So to get one thing out of the way right at the top, I don’t believe that it is mandatory for a bisexual man to pursue a guy and a girl at the same time. as though I don’t know what bisexuality actually is (which was in fact one of the questions in the Q&A). As I said in the debate, if you leave the key under the mat, more people than just you can use it.īut the other kind of plurality in marriage is required by bisexuality, and this argument is the one that results in the incredulity. One is old school - polygamy - and I have argued that it is not possible to argue for homosexual marriage without all those same arguments being available for use by the polygamists later on. There are two kinds of “beyond-two plurality” in marriage. It came up again the other night during the Q&A after my debate with Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, and so I thought I should jot down a few additional thoughts about it here. There is an argument against homosexual marriage that I have offered from time to time which has been met with a strange sort of incredulity.
