• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

must polygamy be legalized ?

  • it is better than monogamy

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    68
Re: polygamy ?

On Politico, we invented reality, not let it be dictated to us............................

I don't know much about politico, but over here where the periods at the end of sentences don't go on for almost the entire length of our posts and where we don't surround four words with a dozen periods on either side, we find it advisable to work in the real world.
 
Last edited:
Re: polygamy ?

I don't know much about politico, but here over the where the periods at the end of sentences don't go on for almost the entire length of the our posts and where we don't surround four words with a dozen periods on either side, we find it advisable to work in the real world.

These types of posters usually don't last too long around here. :mrgreen:
 
Re: polygamy ?

I don't know much about politico, but over here where the periods at the end of sentences don't go on for almost the entire length of our posts and where we don't surround four words with a dozen periods on either side, we find it advisable to work in the real world.

The modern world is about "expressing yourself"....................I suggest you and BChrissieB get with the program.........................
 
Re: polygamy ?

The modern world is about "expressing yourself"....................I suggest you and BChrissieB get with the program.........................

I suggest you stop using the excuse of "expressing yourself" when you do stupid things. Not every dumb little thing you can do is going to be excused by "expressing yourself" in this life and its about damn time you learn it. No, you are not "expressing yourself". You are being stupid.
 
Re: polygamy ?

I suggest you stop using the excuse of "expressing yourself" when you do stupid things. Not every dumb little thing you can do is going to be excused by "expressing yourself" in this life and its about damn time you learn it. No, you are not expressing yourself" You are being stupid.


You're welcome to pass your judgements.......................
 
Barely. But you still can't keep up with the math. If only 3% of men each have 4 wives, that's a little under 12% of women taken, meaning that (again, roughly) you've just turned 9% of your male populace into those "unsuccessful, angry, embittered men with no attachment to the future". That is dangerous, not least for women.

Wow this really took off after my last post. I really want to respond to many other posts and will have to do so tomorrow night (Oh how many more pages will there be?!?). But I can't really let this one go by without making this point.

Those numbers get all skewed with you start taking into account all the sexual orientations. So how much of that 9% of the male population is gay or bi or even asexual (i.e. not interested in having sex/marriage)?

l have seen lots of marriages ended in divorce because some islamist monsters wanted to live with other women because they thought it was their religious right given by god
imagine it will be a legalized action

Ok and this one too....

You keep putting out about a man wanting to live with a 2nd woman (or more) and talking about how the first woman would have to leave. What you are not getting is that there are women out there that WANT a marriage with a man and another women, whether or not she and the other woman will be sexually active with each other. There are also women out there that WANT a marriage with 2 or more men. This is simply statement of fact. I don't think anyone here is advocating that an individual add a third or higher person to their marriage without the consent of the first spouse. Everything you write seems to imply that is what you believe will happen. We are not talking about forced situations here, but ones where ALL involved agree to it. If I want to marry a second woman and my wife also wants that same woman in out marriage, and the other woman wants to be married to the two of us, how am I the monster here? I'm not Islamist, BTW, if that really has any bearing on the matter.
 
Wow this really took off after my last post. I really want to respond to many other posts and will have to do so tomorrow night (Oh how many more pages will there be?!?). But I can't really let this one go by without making this point.

Those numbers get all skewed with you start taking into account all the sexual orientations. So how much of that 9% of the male population is gay or bi or even asexual (i.e. not interested in having sex/marriage)?



Ok and this one too....

You keep putting out about a man wanting to live with a 2nd woman (or more) and talking about how the first woman would have to leave. What you are not getting is that there are women out there that WANT a marriage with a man and another women, whether or not she and the other woman will be sexually active with each other. There are also women out there that WANT a marriage with 2 or more men. This is simply statement of fact. I don't think anyone here is advocating that an individual add a third or higher person to their marriage without the consent of the first spouse. Everything you write seems to imply that is what you believe will happen. We are not talking about forced situations here, but ones where ALL involved agree to it. If I want to marry a second woman and my wife also wants that same woman in out marriage, and the other woman wants to be married to the two of us, how am I the monster here? I'm not Islamist, BTW, if that really has any bearing on the matter.


l am not the only who believes it ,hehe.. .am l ? can you legally marry more than one woman in usa ?


l hate islamist bigot tendencies and your statement reminds me of their stupid defense against every argument and criticism .
 
l am not the only who believes it ,hehe.. .am l ? can you legally marry more than one woman in usa ?


l hate islamist bigot tendencies and your statement reminds me of their stupid defense against every argument and criticism .

The legal argument is a red herring at best and utter BS at worse. At one time I could have used your argument as "Can you (a white man) legally marry a black woman in the USA?" At that time the answer would have been no and thus, in relation to your application, I have made my point of why whites should not be legally allowed to marry blacks. Just because something is currently illegal, does not mean it should be so, nor that it will remain so, or even that it always was.

The biggest difference against what you are railing against and what us polys and our supporters are defending against, is that the islamist would say to his first wife, "It's my right, I'm going to do it, and I don't care what you think or feel and you have to live with it." I'll throw those Mormon fundie idiots in with that mix as well. The rest of us polys, would say to our first spouse, be they male or female, "Dear, here is someone I would like to marry and bring into our family. Do you approve?" The spouse then have several choices; allow the new spouse to come into the marriage, refuse the inclusion, or should the person not heed the rejection, leave the marriage. Can the women under the islamist bigots you decry leave their marriage if they don't like the new spouse?

Now in reality, the above with the poly is oversimplified. For those who practice responsible poly, the spouse is in on the process from the first date. It's not like someone comes home and says, "Honey, I have a surprise! I got married while I was away on my business trip".
 
you read the posts in the thread

in my opinion no one who cares about love ,loyality or woman rights must approve this..

Okay. I'm a woman. I know for a fact that it is possible to truly love more than one person at a time. Love is most certainly not a finite resource. If I believed in marriage, I would certainly appreciate the right to marry the two men I'm in love with. Why do you want to deny me this right? I'm not asking you to be like me. I'm not asking you to open your heart to more than one man if you don't want to. Why do you want to deny people like me the right to legally tie themselves to more than one person? Just because you don't understand me and the way I love others?
 
Okay. I'm a woman. I know for a fact that it is possible to truly love more than one person at a time. Love is most certainly not a finite resource. If I believed in marriage, I would certainly appreciate the right to marry the two men I'm in love with. Why do you want to deny me this right? I'm not asking you to be like me. I'm not asking you to open your heart to more than one man if you don't want to. Why do you want to deny people like me the right to legally tie themselves to more than one person? Just because you don't understand me and the way I love others?

Explain that to the homosexuals who want gay marriage but do not support polygamy, because it's the same argument.
 
Wow this really took off after my last post. I really want to respond to many other posts and will have to do so tomorrow night (Oh how many more pages will there be?!?). But I can't really let this one go by without making this point.

Those numbers get all skewed with you start taking into account all the sexual orientations. So how much of that 9% of the male population is gay or bi or even asexual (i.e. not interested in having sex/marriage)?

A smaller portion than the lesbian population. Which further exacerbates that problem.
 
Explain that to the homosexuals who want gay marriage but do not support polygamy, because it's the same argument.

You'll find that most polys also support SSM.
 
Explain that to the homosexuals who want gay marriage but do not support polygamy, because it's the same argument.

I'll try, but being a homosexual doesn't make a person more prone to understanding the dynamics of polyamory. I don't expect any more understanding from one sexual orientation or another.
 
I have no moral issue with polygamy, but I have practical issues with it. Legalizing polygamy would require changing a lot of laws. Every law we have relating to marriage and divorce are based on two people. And every single one of them would have to be changed to include more than two. That's a lot of work, and a lot of money. I'm not convinced that there are enough people out there who would take advantage of polygamous marriages to make it worth the expense and effort that changing the laws would take.
 
chris
if a person wants to consent to being killed by another one ,will we let it happen because they were consent ?

Yes. We will. It's called euthanasia or assisted suicide. It's legal in a lot of places. Do you also want to deny people the right to die with dignity?
 
Yes. We will. It's called euthanasia or assisted suicide. It's legal in a lot of places. Do you also want to deny people the right to die with dignity?

it is another issue

but can any person who has a little depression be killed because he is consent ?

l dont deny aynthing ,but you may deny the fact that there isnt any limitless freedom!!


l remember soma cannibal stories .their victims were voluntary to be eaten!!

please lets be honest............
 
Last edited:
I have no moral issue with polygamy, but I have practical issues with it. Legalizing polygamy would require changing a lot of laws. Every law we have relating to marriage and divorce are based on two people. And every single one of them would have to be changed to include more than two. That's a lot of work, and a lot of money. I'm not convinced that there are enough people out there who would take advantage of polygamous marriages to make it worth the expense and effort that changing the laws would take.

I don't see why it would be "so" expensive. Exactly what laws would have to be changed?
 
it is another issue

but can any person who has a little depression be killed because he is consent ?

Well, we're talking about marriage. How can you compare the two? No one is talking about "killing" anyone.
 
Well, we're talking about marriage. How can you compare the two? No one is talking about "killing" anyone.

we are talking about a marginal kind marriage
............

and according to arcana ,anybody can be killed if he is consent :confused:

l am pointing out there isnt such a freedom ...

l wasnt referring to euthanasia ,..............:confused:
 
You'll find that most polys also support SSM.

I'm talking about the other direction. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you'll find the majority of SSM supporters also supporting polygamy. Obviously, a set of 3 or more human implies a pair of the same sex. So the direction you mention is implicit straight from the definitions.
 
we are talking about a marginal kind marriage
............

That's only your opinion.

and according to arcana ,anybody can be killed if he is consent :confused:
I don't believe she said that.

l am pointing out there isnt such a freedom ...

As long as no one is getting hurt, why is it anyone else's business? How would you feel if people were sticking their noses into YOUR marriage and telling you that it was disgusting and should be illegal?

l wasnt referring to euthanasia ,..............:confused:

Neither was I, and it still doesn't have anything to do with the topic of marriage.
 
l wonder if a child is consent to pedohilie or incest ,will we let it happen ?

maybe we can change the laws ,many of those children ! already have sex with their own peers
 
l wonder if a child is consent to pedohilie or incest ,will we let it happen ?

maybe we can change the laws ,many of those children ! already have sex with their own peers

What have people been saying over and over and over again? They have been saying that polygamist would have to FOLLOW THE LAW.
 
Back
Top Bottom