• 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!

Should polygamists have the right to marry?

Libertas-Mors

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
370
Reaction score
74
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I say yes. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.
 
In my opinion, it is immoral and wrong. But why should the government be able to stop you? Their role is to protect our freedoms, not limit them. If that's what you want, go for it.
 
I say yes. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.

I say no. There has been no large scale, or even moderately scaled, polygamous society that hasn't revolved around sexism, control, subjugation, and repression. If it could ever prove itself restrained to the rights and liberties of the individual, it can be considered.
 
I don't see why not, if all are consenting adults.
 
Yes they do. But isn't the question whether the government has the legitimate power to declare they can't?
 
I say yes. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.

If gays should be allowed to marry, I can see absolutely no reason why polygamists should not have the same right.

By all means, don't start drawing arbitrary lines in the sand now!
 
I say no. There has been no large scale, or even moderately scaled, polygamous society that hasn't revolved around sexism, control, subjugation, and repression. If it could ever prove itself restrained to the rights and liberties of the individual, it can be considered.

In our society, if all parties enter into the arrangement voluntarily, why should it not be legal? Sexism, control, subjugation, and repression happen regularly in marriages between two people currently.
 
Not with our current marriage laws, in the way we view spouses and what legal rights/benefits/responsibilities/privileges we give spouses. It leads to many complications within our legal system, particularly family/civil law dealing with divorce, spousal rights, distribution of assets, custody of children, etc. There is also an issue of where the limitation is made. If you can marry any infinite number of partners, then what prevents the entire world from being legally married to each other? What prevents someone from marrying 10, 20, 100, 1000 foreigners to get them legal citizenship without getting divorced and how do you prove that the person doesn't love all of those people? Why should society have to pay for INS to investigate all of those marriages, which would be legally required?
 
In our society, if all parties enter into the arrangement voluntarily, why should it not be legal? Sexism, control, subjugation, and repression happen regularly in marriages between two people currently.

Given perfect knowledge this is true. However, typically due to the construct of societies as such the choice is not knowledgeable nor is it free.

As I said, if it can be made to abide by the rights and liberties of the individual, it may be considered.
 
I say no. There has been no large scale, or even moderately scaled, polygamous society that hasn't revolved around sexism, control, subjugation, and repression. If it could ever prove itself restrained to the rights and liberties of the individual, it can be considered.

This is a very compelling reason. I think that, with the proper legal protections in place, consenting adults could make it work, rather than the more common polygamist systems of getting teenage girls into marriages.

Polygamy should be given critical evaluation, its effects on other laws must be considered, and its primary uses must be taken into account. I see no reason on paper why polygamy is not feasible.

I don't see why not, if all are consenting adults.

Indeed. Many times it is not. That's the only reason I can see to prevent it. Though I do also see the argument that everyone could marry everyone else, thus making marriage in general moot. The notion behind a marriage is a deeper level of commitment than most other relationships. If such a relationship can be built with more than two consenting adults, I see no reason to prevent it. But the inheritance and medical proxies make it complex. If there are three members in a marriage, and one is in a coma, and one spouse wants to pull the plug and the other does not, how would it be determined? It would be complex legally. Not impossible, not prohibitively complex. But complex.
 
I say yes. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.

As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult (this would exclude, e.g., cultural coercion (I'm looking at you Mormons)), I do not give a ****.
 
Food for thought...

David Friedman, economist and Steve Sailer, journalist have argued that polygamy tends to benefit most women and disadvantage most men, under the assumption that most men and women do not practice it. The idea is firstly that many women would prefer half or one third of someone especially appealing to being the single spouse of someone that does not provide as much economic utility to them. Secondly, that the remaining women have a better market for finding a spouse themselves. Say that 20% of women are married to 10% of men, that leaves 90% of men to compete over the remaining 80% of women. Friedman uses this viewpoint to argue in favor of legalizing polygamy, while Sailer uses it to argue against legalizing it

Confused yet?
 
As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult (this would exclude, e.g., cultural coercion (I'm looking at you Mormons)), I do not give a ****.

As far as I know, Mormons don't coerce anyone into polygamous relationships. I know a fair number of Mormons, all of them in monogamous marriages, but of the polygamous marriage practicioners that I've seen, they don't appear to be coerced or urged in any manner.
 
Oh, why the hell not? We're on the edge of that slippery slope now . . . let's just get it over with.

That's what I say, Maggie. Now my cat and parakeet wanna get married. So I said...what the hell, go for it. Guess we'll have some paracats running or skipping, or...kinda flying around the house. ;)
 
That's what I say, Maggie. Now my cat and parakeet wanna get married. So I said...what the hell, go for it. Guess we'll have some paracats running or skipping, or...kinda flying around the house. ;)
How am I harmed if your cat and parakeet marry?
 
As far as I know, Mormons don't coerce anyone into polygamous relationships. I know a fair number of Mormons, all of them in monogamous marriages, but of the polygamous marriage practicioners that I've seen, they don't appear to be coerced or urged in any manner.


Google Warren Jeffs. Modern orthodox Mormons have quite rightly stepped away from their abusive history, but examples of it still exist in the modern world.
 
If gays should be allowed to marry, I can see absolutely no reason why polygamists should not have the same right.

By all means, don't start drawing arbitrary lines in the sand now!

Indeed, the question is over the government and its role in sanctioning these marriages and providing the same tax benefits.
 
I say no. There has been no large scale, or even moderately scaled, polygamous society that hasn't revolved around sexism, control, subjugation, and repression. If it could ever prove itself restrained to the rights and liberties of the individual, it can be considered.

The problem with these type of 'statistical arguments' is that they can be used against positions that you probably hold like gay marriage. Discriminating against an entire group of people based on statistics or even worse historical examples gets you into all kinds of ugly contradictions.
 
That's what I say, Maggie. Now my cat and parakeet wanna get married. So I said...what the hell, go for it. Guess we'll have some paracats running or skipping, or...kinda flying around the house. ;)

At least divorce wouldn't be a complicated process . . .




Bad news.jpg
 
I don't think we should stop polygamists from saying they are married or living together, but I don't think the state should legally recognize polygamous relationships as a marriage.
 
Back
Top Bottom