It's a red herring in the sense that saying gay marriage doesn't logically suggest that polygamy must be legalized too in order to remain consistent...there's basically nothing linking the two from a logical standpoint other than bias against them as "nontraditional".
I agree with you...... I should be more precise, it seems that people toss out polygamy as if it is a joke (i.e. not a serious concern) and I believe that there will be a call for their rights to be considered.
Funny how the Supreme Court's rulings on things become law. I always thought the point of the Judiciary was to decide how to apply the law on a case by case basis. Instead they take one case and make it law. In my opinion, many of their rulings should be challenged. Of course, most would argue that they can't be. What a shame.
It's called the common law system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common...systems_as_opposed_to_civil_law_legal_systems You can choose to live in Europe if you want it to be otherwise.
Why would you always think this? The precedent system in common law countries dates back hundreds of years - you have "always thought the point of the Judiciary" was more akin to a civil law system...did you mayhaps grow up in France, Spain, Portugal or another civil law jurisdiction?
It is not the Relative Court, and there are thousands below it that enforce the crappy city ordinances and dated, insular and retributive social norms you're subliminally advocating.
