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 don’t care what they do as long as they stay out of my business.

    34 35.05%
  • My cat’s name is Mittens.

    10 10.31%
Page 5 of 73 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 725

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

  1. #41
    Professor
    Mathematician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    09-22-17 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    2,147

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Should Plural Marriage be legalized too?
    Lose the "too", because SSM shouldn't be.
    "With me everything turns into mathematics."
    "It is not enough to have a good mind. The main thing is to use it well."
    "It is truth very certain that, when it is not in one's power to determine what is true, we ought to follow what is more probable." -- Rene Descartes

  2. #42
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    Wiseone posted you a nice little chart in post #21. The bible condones many different types of marriage, to include polygamy. Polygamy has been around for thousands and thousands of years, in many different societies and cultures, such as among the hebrews, the chinese, the greeks, indians, native americans, africans, polynesians, etc.

    Marriage has been a LOT of things to a LOT of different people. You don't get to patent it and own the term.

    Do you still support the rapist:victim marriage law, or the war bride law? Or have you decided which biblical marriage laws you like to support and which you like to ignore?
    You are, of course, completely dodging the question to which you are purporting to respond.

    Every example in the chart rather exaggerated chart posted by Wiseone shows marriage between a man and a woman. Every example of marriage in any of the societies which you've cited is between a man and a woman. Every society of any size that has ever remained stable for any significant period of history was founded on families, built on marriages between a man and a woman. Every society that has deviated from this model has fallen into degradation, collapse, and extinction. Ours will be no exception.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  3. #43
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

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

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    So if a man marries two women, are those two women also married? And could one of those women take another husband? Would that mean the fist man is married to the second man?

    Polygamy requires same-sex marriage to be legal. But same-sex marriage doesn't require polygamy to be legal.
    No.

    When a man marries two wives, the man is in two separate marriages. Each marriage is between a man and a woman. There is no such thing, has never been, and can never be, as a marriage that is not between a man and a woman. That is what marriage is, by definition. The two wives are not married to each other; it is nonsense to suggest that they are. Should one of the wives take a second husband, then that would mean that she is in two marriages; again, each marriage is between that woman and a different man, and does not mean that the two men are married to each other.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  4. #44
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

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

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    So if a man marries two women, are those two women also married? And could one of those women take another husband? Would that mean the fist man is married to the second man?

    Polygamy requires same-sex marriage to be legal. But same-sex marriage doesn't require polygamy to be legal.
    This is kinda where the argument gets muddy. Especially when it starts with "a married person should be able to marry other people, too", because it's adding a person into a marriage without the consent of the other person already in the marriage. If two men are married, and then they both marry two women, who are both already married... did both spouses of the two women have full knowledge of all the links in this chain? Did they give consent to each person in the chain to join it? Are they all spouses to each other? What rights do each end of the chain have towards the other end in terms of property, inheritance, or children?

    In principal, I see no reason to restrict marriage to pairs. In practice, it strikes me as incredibly muddy and complex. Joining marriages together seems like a terrible way to do it, but allowing a person to only be in one marriage at once, but not limiting that marriage to two people, strikes me as more reasonable.

    Either way, it's an entirely different argument than gay marriage, and the attempts by the anti-SSM crowd to link them got old a long time ago.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #45
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

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

    If one could reasonably and realistically navigate the legal complications I see no problem with polygamist marriage as a legal institution.

    There are significant issues, though. Divorce, child support, legal rights as it relates to next-of-kin, implied inheritance, etc. Morally, (on the surface) I don't see an issue. What harm is done by 3 consenting adults contractually obligating themselves to one another that isn't done by 2 consenting adults doing the same thing? Sure, we can delve into the Jeff Warrens and cultist polygamy and act as if we can make a blanket generalization, but that's like saying all poor women are bad mothers. It just doesn't compute.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  6. #46
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,587

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    You are, of course, completely dodging the question to which you are purporting to respond.

    Every example in the chart rather exaggerated chart posted by Wiseone shows marriage between a man and a woman. Every example of marriage in any of the societies which you've cited is between a man and a woman. Every society of any size that has ever remained stable for any significant period of history was founded on families, built on marriages between a man and a woman. Every society that has deviated from this model has fallen into degradation, collapse, and extinction. Ours will be no exception.
    1) The topic is actually polygamy, which you don't support, though your bible does. You said marriage has always been between A man and A woman, and I showed this to be completely and entirely false.

    2) You're saying the hebrews, the chinese, the greeks, indians, native americans, africans, and polynesians have fallen into degradation, collapse, and extinction? And this was all because they didn't listen to your opinion about what a marriage is? ....Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    There is no such thing, has never been, and can never be, as a marriage that is not between a man and a woman.
    Considering there are plenty of legal, gay married couples in the US and the world, I would say you were caught again making things up.

    You, Bob Blaylock, do not get to patent the term marriage, and you didn't invent it. Why would you think you own that term?
    Last edited by RabidAlpaca; 06-23-13 at 02:51 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  7. #47
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    1) The topic is actually polygamy, which you don't support, though your bible does. You said marriage has always been between A man and A woman, and I showed this to be completely and entirely false.
    Except that you didn't. You've not shown any valid example of a marriage that was not between a man and a woman. Even in polygamous marriages, each marriage is between a man and a woman. The only difference between that and monogamy is that in a polygamous situation, some people are in more than one marriage at a time; but each marriage is still between a man and a woman. That is the essential, defining characteristic of marriage.

    I'm not really solidly opposed to polygamy. I'm a fourth-generation Mormon, and I have at least one known ancestor who practiced it during the time in which my religion upheld this practice. My great-great grandfather, Edwin Rushton (famous as the source of the alleged ”White Horse Prophecy”) had four or five wives. As you point out, polygamy is supported by biblical and historical precedents. And unlike “gay marriage” it both meets the essential definition of marriage, and fulfills the purpose of marriage; while “gay marriage” does not meet this definition, and can only undermine and degrade the purpose of genuine marriage.
    Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 06-23-13 at 03:05 PM. Reason: May the Forks be with you, always.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  8. #48
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,587

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Except that you didn't. You've not shown any valid example of a marriage that was not between a man and a woman. Even in polygamous marriages, each marriage is between a man and a woman. The only difference between that and monogamy is that in a polygamous situation, some people are in more than one marriage at a time; but each marriage is still between a man and a woman. That is the essential, defining characteristic of marriage.
    No, you are wrong. A polygamous marriage is between a man and women. (plural) Or a woman and men (plural) or women and men (plural). A marriage between a man and a woman (singular) is not polygamy, because it does not match the definition, at all.

    They go over the distinction between plural and singular at a rather early age. Were you perhaps sick that day?

    I think what you're trying, but failing, to say, is even in polygamy, the relationship is heterosexual. Which confuses me because the topic of the OP is POLYGAMY. Keep your gay hating out of it for just one thread, please.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  9. #49
    Question authority
    Grand Mal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    on an island off the left coast of Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    16,511
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    The legal nightmare it would present, as well as societal standards and customs.
    Those shouldn't considerations when deciding to dictate that people can't do what they want.

  10. #50
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    No, you are wrong. A polygamous marriage is between a man and women. (plural) Or a woman and men (plural) or women and men (plural). A marriage between a man and a woman (singular) is not polygamy, because it does not match the definition, at all.

    They go over the distinction between plural and singular at a rather early age. Were you perhaps sick that day?
    A plural marriage is not one marriage with more than two participants. In fact, “a plural marriage” really isn't even grammatically correct. It's plural marriages. More than one marriage.

    My great-great grandfather did not have one marriage which included him and his four or five wives. He had four or five marriages, which each joined him to a separate wife. Each of these marriages was between one man, and one woman; it was the same man in each marriage, but a different woman.
    Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 06-23-13 at 03:17 PM. Reason: May the Forks be with you, always.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

Page 5 of 73 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... 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
  •