Columbia Legalizes First All Male « ménage à 3 »

On June 3, 2017 Columbia legalized a union between 3 men for the first time ever. The men forming this “trouple” include an actor, a physical education instructor and a journalist. They are registered under the legal patrimonial system known as “trieja”. Two of the men were the first to be married in 2000 by a notary, well before marriage between individuals of the same sex was legalized in 2016. 
« We wanted to formalize our household, our family. There were no legal acknowledgements for us as a family” declared Victor Hugo Prada, one of the members.  This “trouple” qualify themselves as a “polyamourous” family. Germain Rincon Perfetti, the lawyer for the “LGBTI” association (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transsexual and intersexual) declares: “This is an acknowledgement that different types of families exist”.
Other three-way partnerships have been recognized in different countries such as the 3 Brazilian women in 2015 or the 3 American women in 2014, with one of the women expecting a child conceived by IVF.
Tugdual Derville, Alliance VITA’s General Delegate:
« This is a symbolic first step, not in itself, but by the complacent media coverage. It’s part of a relentless legal offensive against marriage founded on sexual complementarity and fidelity. As the lawyer Caroline Mécary admitted in November 2013: « To succeed in abolishing marriage, we first have to make sure that it is available to everyone”. In January of the same year she declared: “It was pertinent and coherent to take advantage of advocating civil marriage for same-sex couples to achieve marriage secularization, by removing the promise of fidelity…” To destroy marriages, its definition is being warped through several steps, according to the one step at a time policy.
The same individuals intending to deconstruct society previously berated others who warned against polygamy as a foregone conclusion to the “marriage for all” movement are now supporting a legal recognition of polyandry, even daring to label this as a “family”. 
The tyranny of individualistic desires is constantly gained at the expense of those who are the most vulnerable. The “happiness” expressed by the “trouple” of men is factitious, and doesn’t take into account the underlying issue of children that will certainly be demanded by virtue of their so-called “family”.