That's an accurate assessment of marriage within Judaism. What you said before was not.I suspected that. So I'll make it simpler and say that the definition of marriage five or six hundred years before Christ is not a static definition. Marriage as a concept evolved from one man with as many women as he could take or buy, into one man and one woman.
This is a straw man so transparent that it would cause eye rolling in a high school level debate.Come to think of it, that's the logical next step for the left. "What! Marriage has never ever been defined as the union of one man and one woman! How dare you try to change marriage!"
I've never encountered anyone on the left deal with this issue based on historical "definitions" of marriage. Their position is generally that marriage has evolved over time, and that it is whatever society considers to be acceptable.
And they're correct.
After all, even ignoring the polygamy issue, we are not that far removed from marriage between 30-year-old men and 13-year-old girls being routine. And from marriages between blacks and whites being not just frowned upon but illegal.
Try addressing the examples above.After all, there are still today some men living with multiple wives, so clearly (by proggie standards anyway) marriage means whatever anyone wants it to mean.
Good thing I never said it did get me "closer" to same sex marriage. I objected to your comments only because they were historically bogus. The larger point about polygamy goes to the issue of marriage evolving over time, as opposed to the pervasive right-wing lie that it's been "one man and one woman bound for all eternity" for 3,000 years.(We'll ignore for the moment that Jewish polygamy doesn't actually get you any closer to same sex marriage as it still required one man and one woman for EACH marriage; a man could not marry a man, nor a woman marry a woman.)
Good. Now try being honest enough to admit that the definition of marriage has changed many times throughout history, and that gay marriage is just one more step in that natural evolution.The difference seems to be that I'm honest enough to admit that opening up marriage to gays IS a change.