View Poll Results: What say you?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. All humans should be protected under the law.

    27 27.84%
  • No. Marriage is between one man and one woman, period.

    20 20.62%
  • No. Only homosexuals and heterosexuals should be allowed to marry.

    6 6.19%
  • I donít care what they do as long as they stay out of my business.

    34 35.05%
  • My catís name is Mittens.

    10 10.31%
Page 20 of 73 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 725

Thread: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

  1. #191
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by mpg View Post
    Please elaborate. Thank you.
    Look at tax code alone.

    If you are married to two women, can you claim them both as a dependent? Can all three of you file "jointly"? If one of those two women is married to a second man, can both husbands claim her as a dependant? Which claims her income, if there is any? If she has a child with the second man, but the child spends significantly more time with the household of the first man, can the first man claim the child as a dependant? What about if the second man is married to a completely seperate woman as well and they have a kid. The wife the two men share is now the "mother" of another woman's child, who and how can that child be claimed for tax purposes?

    I have no issue with polygamy on a private level being legal. I don't believe that it's a benefit to society or government to legalize the notion in terms of the LEGAL term and benefits that come with it, nor do I find a compelling Equal Protection Clause argument for it in the same way there is for Same-Sex Marriage.

  2. #192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Look at tax code alone.

    If you are married to two women, can you claim them both as a dependent?
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Can all three of you file "jointly"?
    Married-joint or married-separate, as appropriate for their situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    If one of those two women is married to a second man, can both husbands claim her as a dependent? Which claims her income, if there is any? If she has a child with the second man, but the child spends significantly more time with the household of the first man, can the first man claim the child as a dependant? What about if the second man is married to a completely seperate woman as well and they have a kid. The wife the two men share is now the "mother" of another woman's child, who and how can that child be claimed for tax purposes?
    That's communal marriage. No one is supporting communal marriage. People are supporting polygyny and polyandry, where a man or woman takes multiple wives/husbands, and there is no marriage between the wives/husbands.

    Children of these polygamist marriages would legally 'belong' to their bio parents, with the other members of the marriage having some level of step-parent authority, which is itself very limited.
    Last edited by Jerry; 06-24-13 at 04:25 PM.

  3. #193
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by csense View Post
    I see. Since you can't refute what I said, it has now become irrelevant. Typical Liberal.
    Actually, it's irrelevant because it's irrelevant. Typical conservative to not see that.

    Now, you want to dispense with the stupid hackery and actually debate?

    Your moral argument has no basis since Polygamy introduces no new element that isn't already contained within SSM and traditional marriage. The same is true for your legal argument. Multiple wives, multiple husbands, multiple mothers and multiple fathers. Polygamy adds no new element.
    Of course it adds a new element. Polygamy is not a sexual orientation. Major dissimilarity.

    As for your logical argument...well, you have no logical argument.
    And since you have not presented a logical argument, I suspect you would have a hard time telling the difference.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  4. #194
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Communal marriage can be a form of polygamy, so saying it's communal marriage on it's own is not really a counter.

    However, upon realization, the issue I stated in the longer portion of it is one not born of polygamy but of the notion of allowing multiple marriages. If an individual can only enter into one "marriage" at any given time, regardless of how many people are involved, then those problems do reduce.

  5. #195
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,677

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    I think the critical part here is "Sane"... if a guy wants to marry 50 women... then you cant say he is sane..
    It doesnt have to be'50'. Hel...TWO is insanity. What do you get when you marry 2 women? TWO WOMEN!

  6. #196
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Well that is just stupid. Not every one fears everything which is different. Sometimes different is good.
    then polygamy is perfectly acceptable and should be legal.

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Communal marriage can be a form of polygamy, so saying it's communal marriage on it's own is not really a counter.
    Right, but on other threads, especially gun threads, people get all pissed when I stick to exact names of things.

    I didn't stick to the exact name of a thing here and it caused confusion about what I was trying to say. Words mean things, words matter, using the correct nomenclature is important. I will go back to being precise on the words I use and await the usual suspects to accuse me of playing semantics.

    It's not a clip, it's a magazine; it's not polygamy, it's polygyny and polyandry specifically.

  8. #198
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    then polygamy is perfectly acceptable and should be legal.
    Why? Your fear of what is different has nothing to do with whether it is good or not.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #199
    Advisor csense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    NE Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    329

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    That's right, my being a liberal made you post irrelevant crap. .
    You asked a question with a pending conclusion that is mitigated by the answer. I answered that question, so it's not irrelevant. If you don't like the answer, then don't ask such questions on a public board. You're free to disagree with it and demonstrate why, but to dismiss it as impertinent is bizarre to say the least.



    so you think 2 is the same as more than 2.
    As it pertains to this discussion, yes, since both are completely arbitrary with regard to quantifying marriage, as I've demonstrated. If you disagree with that then you need to show that "2" is logically inferred, without invoking traditional marriage, since that has now been redefined. Good luck demonstrating that, because you can't.

  10. #200
    Advisor csense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    NE Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    329

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Actually, it's irrelevant because it's irrelevant. Typical conservative to not see that.

    Now, you want to dispense with the stupid hackery and actually debate?

    You offer up a tautology, and you're calling me stupid.

    See my reply to Redress



    Of course it adds a new element. Polygamy is not a sexual orientation.
    Neither is the term marriage or same sex marriage a sexual orientation. They are simply descriptive terms, nothing more. But if your point is that two men or two women need to have a certain sexual orientation in order to get married, then that would be discrimination, and discrimination is wrong isn't it. likewise, those in a polygamous marriage can have whatever sexual identity they want.

    In short, sexual orientation is irrelevant with regard to whether SSM and polygamy are analogous. Unless of course, you plan on having a test for such things before people get married. If so, good luck with that.

    And since you have not presented a logical argument...
    So I've been told, yet, no one has refuted any of my arguments. You and others simply dismiss them offhand. You are, of course, free to do so, but it doesn't speak very well of your integrity

Page 20 of 73 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •