View Poll Results: Read the OP and answer

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    27 58.70%
  • No

    19 41.30%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49

Thread: Polygamy

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Polygamy

    I am in favor of polygamy, as long as it includes multiple male and female spouses. I get confused about how much of a role the government should play in defining these things. There are implications for the government relating to benefits, inheritance issues and child custody (as Arcana XV pointed out) and taxation. If the government removed all definitions of marriage, then that may be the same as defining that anyone could marry. It may be better for the government to define civil unions forming incorporated entities with two or more adults that would be relevant for benefits, inheritance issues and child custody (as Arcana XV pointed out) and taxation. Then let the marriage stuff fall to the churches.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    11-20-14 @ 04:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    316
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Polygamy

    Anyone who wants more than one wife is crazy if you ask me. Whatever floats their boat.. One wife is bad enough, thats all I'm saying.

  3. #13
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    06-17-18 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,096

    Re: Polygamy

    I would vote yes. I don't see the big fuss about it.
    However many aspects of laws would need to be rewritten to accommodate the change.


  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 01:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: Polygamy

    Quote Originally Posted by R. Shackleferd View Post
    Anyone who wants more than one wife is crazy if you ask me. Whatever floats their boat.. One wife is bad enough, thats all I'm saying.
    You need a girl from one of the stans theyre quiet and do what you say and clean everything and raise the kids for ya.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    11-20-14 @ 04:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    316
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Polygamy

    Now that you mention that, I would like two of those.

  6. #16
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rolesville, NC
    Last Seen
    06-12-18 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    30,320

    Re: Polygamy

    Depends. I would want extra rules in place to protect the members of the marriage. I think it should be legal to have a group marriage, but not so much multiple wives or husbands. And it would be important to have rules in place for some of the problems that could be easily anticipated beforehand, especially rules regarding someone who wants to get out of the marriage and who actually has say over the medical and legal decisions. I would not just vote for it just because it was proposed. Plus, there is much more of a potential for this to be abused than any two-people only marriage. With couple marriages, someone who is trying to scam the system is limited by the fact that if they do want to actually get married to someone they would truly consider a spouse, then they have to divorce from the scam marriage first. On the other hand, if the rules were just that you could enter into the contract as many times as you wanted with different people, then what is to keep people from taking several spouses, who may or may not know about each other, just to get extra benefits. And, if they don't know about each other, then that leaves a potential for huge problems concerning estate and entitlement benefits.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #17
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,286

    Re: Polygamy

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Depends. I would want extra rules in place to protect the members of the marriage. I think it should be legal to have a group marriage, but not so much multiple wives or husbands. And it would be important to have rules in place for some of the problems that could be easily anticipated beforehand, especially rules regarding someone who wants to get out of the marriage and who actually has say over the medical and legal decisions. I would not just vote for it just because it was proposed. Plus, there is much more of a potential for this to be abused than any two-people only marriage. With couple marriages, someone who is trying to scam the system is limited by the fact that if they do want to actually get married to someone they would truly consider a spouse, then they have to divorce from the scam marriage first. On the other hand, if the rules were just that you could enter into the contract as many times as you wanted with different people, then what is to keep people from taking several spouses, who may or may not know about each other, just to get extra benefits. And, if they don't know about each other, then that leaves a potential for huge problems concerning estate and entitlement benefits.

    The first thing you'd have to say is that it all has to be open and aboveboard; if Spouse1 is already married to Spouse2 and Spouse3, they'd have to ALL legally consent and sign papers to that effect before Spouse4 could be added to the marriage. Public notification of some sort, like an add in the local paper, also.

    That would be assuming you allowed "add-ons" after the initial marriage.


    To answer the question, I would probably stand neutral and neither support nor oppose, depending on the details. If the law enabling polygamy looked badly written, ill-considered or otherwise not covering all the bases that needed to be covered, I might oppose that particular law.

    Polygamy has a long established history and was a successful family/reproductive/child-rearing institution for millenia in many cultures. Therefore I have no particular societal objections to it, nor do I have any substantive moral criticism to make, though I consider lifetime monogamy to be more ideal.

    On consideration, it is possible that polygamy might actually make marriages more stable and provide some advantages in childrearing. A man with three wives already has his "variety" built into his marriage; perhaps that would cut down on adultery. Joe and Jane might have regular jobs while Mary and Sue tend to the home and the children.

    IIRC the OP said "polygamy". Whether he meant polygamy alone, or also polyandry or polyamory I don't know, though I would speculate he probably did mean "group marriages of whatever makeup". Historically polyandry has been practiced but rather rarely; offhand I don't know that polyamory or group marriages have any historical precedent. The idea of polyamorous or group marriage doesn't blow my mind, though, having read a lot of Heinlein growing up.

    However the social and interpersonal dynamics of such arraingements ought to be studied and given careful consideration before we go there. We don't want to frack up the institution of marriage more than it already is, we'd want to have some idea of how well polyandry or polyamory would work before we instituted such plans.

    Polyandry would be reproduction-neutral: that is, one wife and multiple husbands would produce no more children than one husband-one wife, because there is only one womb involved.

    If all of that were legally instituted, I think polygamy would be somewhat uncommon but the most popular; polyamory/group marriages the next most popular; polyandry the most rare. I doubt there are many men who would see benefits in sharing a wife with one or more other men, and as noted the historical precedent is relatively rare.

    At any rate, it is an intresting question as there is much to discuss on the subject.

    Does anyone here have friends who live in a polyamorous/group relationship, regardless of the lack of legal recognition? I'd be curious as to any insights you might have. I knew a fellow who lived in such a household, a neo-pagan group to be specific, (and yes they had kids), but we didn't know each other well enough to discuss the juicy details, lol.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  8. #18
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 05:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Polygamy

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    If your state were to propose a law or ballot initiative allowing for persons to be married to more than one partner, would you support it? Why or why not?
    Nope.

    1234
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  9. #19
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:52 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    94,911
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Polygamy

    I would tend to oppose it, though probably not real actively. I do not see it as necessary like I see gay marriage(before some one goes into the whole hypocrisy thing, remember, being gay is something you are, polygamy is something you do, completely different), I don't see it as benefiting society, and the laws involved would be incredibly complex.
    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
    Iíve always believed that America is an idea, not defined by its people but by its ideals. - Lindsey Graham

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Polygamy

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I would tend to oppose it, though probably not real actively. I do not see it as necessary like I see gay marriage(before some one goes into the whole hypocrisy thing, remember, being gay is something you are, polygamy is something you do, completely different), I don't see it as benefiting society, and the laws involved would be incredibly complex.
    You don't see a family, as an economic entity and as a child rearing entity, as benefiting society when it can broaden the adult representation beyond 2 people? In that scenario, I see that some adults would chose to raise children and care for the household, some adults would pursue education and sabbaticals, some adults would choose to work and develop their career or start businesses, and some adults would go on adventure and play (sailing around the world). More adults can ensure economic stability while others pursue their other plans.

    Set it up as a incorporated civil union. You may be required to buy shares to enter the family. You hold a percentage of assets and liabilities. If you decide to divorce yourself, you get out the percentage you own. Divorce maintains family stability.

    There are a lot of advantages.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •