Incest is covered by the impossible consent issue.
As far as polyperson marriage, I would say that the right to marry multiple people is a universal human right, yes. I would, however, say that there is a compelling government interest in restricting the rights granted by the government to go along with marriage to one person per person at any given time.
Let's do remember that there are two issues here: The right of individual people to cohabit and present themselves as married, and the right to have their relationship recognized in the eyes of the law. To be fair to your side, Loving removed laws that infringed BOTH, and at this late date there is little obstacle to members of the same sex (or a group) living as a married couple (unit) and calling themselves married, as there was to the Lovings, who were committing a crime in Virginia by doing so. Whether equality demands that we offer the governmental rights to such people is, I would say, an obvious decision based on the human right to equality and non-discrimination, with the caveat that in such equality interest, the government has a interest in limiting the number of benefits tied to any given person (so, say, a bigamist could only designate ONE wife as his wife under law. Given a poly-person situation, I waffle on whether the government could require that all such designations be reciprocal, and whether to permit pre-determined survivorship charts).
no subject
As far as polyperson marriage, I would say that the right to marry multiple people is a universal human right, yes. I would, however, say that there is a compelling government interest in restricting the rights granted by the government to go along with marriage to one person per person at any given time.
Let's do remember that there are two issues here: The right of individual people to cohabit and present themselves as married, and the right to have their relationship recognized in the eyes of the law. To be fair to your side, Loving removed laws that infringed BOTH, and at this late date there is little obstacle to members of the same sex (or a group) living as a married couple (unit) and calling themselves married, as there was to the Lovings, who were committing a crime in Virginia by doing so. Whether equality demands that we offer the governmental rights to such people is, I would say, an obvious decision based on the human right to equality and non-discrimination, with the caveat that in such equality interest, the government has a interest in limiting the number of benefits tied to any given person (so, say, a bigamist could only designate ONE wife as his wife under law. Given a poly-person situation, I waffle on whether the government could require that all such designations be reciprocal, and whether to permit pre-determined survivorship charts).