• 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?

digsbe said:
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.
Click to expand...

Why? Should the state recognize gay marriages? Is the right to marry for consenting adults not universal?
 
Libertas-Mors said:
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.
Click to expand...

The specific statistical argument he's making couldn't actually be used against gay marriage. There's no history of gay marriage involving control, subjugation and repression (except to the extent that some people are opposed to it).

To be clear, I don't think such an argument is entirely a valid reason to oppose polygamy either (assuming the proper safeguards are in place), but it's a much better argument in that context than it is with respect to gay marriage.
 
Libertas-Mors said:
Why? Should the state recognize gay marriages? Is the right to marry for consenting adults not universal?
Click to expand...

I don't think the state should be forced to recognize gay marriage, I think it's up to the state to chose if they want to or not.

The right to marry for consenting adults is the right to marry within the legal definition of marriage which can be one man one woman, same sex, or multiple partners.

As far as marriage goes we would have to rework the system to allow for multiple partners and personally I don't think it should be legally recognized anyway. Just because adults consent doesn't mean that their relationship should be legally recognized, it means that they can have sex or live together without anyone stopping them.
 
Aderleth said:
The specific statistical argument he's making couldn't actually be used against gay marriage. There's no history of gay marriage involving control, subjugation and repression (except to the extent that some people are opposed to it).

To be clear, I don't think such an argument is entirely a valid reason to oppose polygamy either (assuming the proper safeguards are in place), but it's a much better argument in that context than it is with respect to gay marriage.
Click to expand...

1) different statistical arguments could, however, be used. Like the percentage of straight couples vs gay couples that have kids as a reason against gay marriage. I'm not saying that any of these sort of arguments are valid either, just showing how it can be turned on its head.

2) yes, but if we play games with statistics then we can conjure up all sorts of reasons to discriminate. Refer to point 1: the state would restrict gay marriage since statistically gay couples (even married ones where its legal) are less likely to have children and therefore shouldn't have the same tax breaks. And around and round it goes.
 
Libertas-Mors said:
1) different statistical arguments could, however, be used. Like the percentage of straight couples vs gay couples that have kids as a reason against gay marriage. I'm not saying that any of these sort of arguments are valid either, just showing how it can be turned on its head.

2) yes, but if we play games with statistics then we can conjure up all sorts of reasons to discriminate. Refer to point 1: the state would restrict gay marriage since statistically gay couples (even married ones where its legal) are less likely to have children and therefore shouldn't have the same tax breaks. And around and round it goes.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but that's a bit tricky. Mostly because the statistical argument you're currently bringing up actually could be equally applied to certain types of straight couple (e.g. an elderly widow and widower getting married) that would preclude any kind of reasoning along straight/gay lines. I think the better response to Ikari's argument is that proper safeguards could be put in place to prevent coercion and the like. The statistical arguments really can't be applied equally
 
Aderleth said:
I see your point, but that's a bit tricky. Mostly because the statistical argument you're currently bringing up actually could be equally applied to certain types of straight couple (e.g. an elderly widow and widower getting married) that would preclude any kind of reasoning along straight/gay lines. I think the better response to Ikari's argument is that proper safeguards could be put in place to prevent coercion and the like. The statistical arguments really can't be applied equally
Click to expand...

That all depends on how nuanced you want to get with the law. It could operate in generalities such as gay vs straight couples total population that have kids. The small amount of elderly and impotent couples that marry would be inconsequential in comparison to the larger picture.

And I think that a proper response to her argument is to first of all point out the fallacy of her reasoning and secondly to proceed as you recommend.
 
iguanaman said:
Do you have a fondness for 13 year old girls? That is what polygamy is about.
Click to expand...

That's analogous to equating gay marriage with pedophilia. Good job captain fallacy.
 
Libertas-Mors said:
That all depends on how nuanced you want to get with the law. It could operate in generalities such as gay vs straight couples total population that have kids. The small amount of elderly and impotent couples that marry would be inconsequential in comparison to the larger picture.

And I think that a proper response to her argument is to first of all point out the fallacy of her reasoning and secondly to proceed as you recommend.
Click to expand...

I agree with that last sentence (for obvious reasons) but also wanted to point out that Ikari's a dude. He's just an anime fan (apparently). ;)
 
MaggieD said:
Oh, why the hell not? We're on the edge of that slippery slope now . . . let's just get it over with.
Click to expand...

You don't know what a polygamist cult does or you would not say that. It is nothing but a group of men who prey on the female children of each others wives. It is really about molesting children. The male children are thrown out at 18...they are competition and not welcome.
 
Libertas-Mors said:
I say yes. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.
Click to expand...

i agree 100% as long as it follows the general rules

consenting adults :shrug:

polygamy would be lumped together with equal gay rights if it wasnt a new right but i see nothing wrong with it at all following those guidelines.

the onle real hurdle polygamy has is dropping the stereotype of nonadult forced marriages, whcih objective people get thats not wat all polygamy is and the rules.

What rules?

Husband one dies
wife one lives in house A with 3 kids
wife two lives in house B with no kids
wife 3 lives in house B also with 2 kids

what happens?

the legality of it is a nightmare as far as coming up with a standard default process.
Of course im sure each marriage would be custom and there would be legal steps taken to do what the families want but the default situation will be tough.

but again im all for it as i see ZERO logical reason to be fight against LEGALLY

a person can be against it personally if they want though
 
Last edited:
Aderleth said:
I agree with that last sentence (for obvious reasons) but also wanted to point out that Ikari's a dude. He's just an anime fan (apparently). ;)
Click to expand...

Lol on both accounts! I guess you can never be too sure about the sex of the poster on the interwebz even when there's a female name.
 
iguanaman said:
You don't know what a polygamist cult does or you would not say that. It is nothing but a group of men who prey on the female children of each others wives. It is really about molesting children. The male children are thrown out at 18...they are competition and not welcome.
Click to expand...

Sounds racist lol.
 
iguanaman said:
You don't know what a polygamist cult does or you would not say that. It is nothing but a group of men who prey on the female children of each others wives. It is really about molesting children. The male children are thrown out at 18...they are competition and not welcome.
Click to expand...

false, this is what some criminals do and try to do but grouping those criminals in with all polygamist is just as logical as grouping in cheaters, spouse beaters etc in with all marriages.
Its nonsensical and dishonest.
 
iguanaman said:
Do you have a fondness for 13 year old girls? That is what polygamy is about.
Click to expand...

well with this single post you just proved how dishonest you are and how uneducated you are about polygamy.

I love when people draw blanket conclusion and judge a group based on some, its always an epic failure.
 
AGENT J said:
well with this single post you just proved how dishonest you are and how uneducated you are about polygamy.

I love when people draw blanket conclusion and judge a group based on some, its always an epic failure.
Click to expand...

The best is when they hypocritically do it while sounding off about others doing it to groups whom they prefer.
 
AGENT J said:
false, this is what some criminals do and try to do but grouping those criminals in with all polygamist is just as logical as grouping in cheaters, spouse beaters etc in with all marriages.
Its nonsensical and dishonest.
Click to expand...

What others are you talking about? I really have not heard of these. Give me some examples of polygamy where they don't marry each others daughters. That would be the thing to look for.

Communes, open marriages, gay marriages, you name it. Anything goes for me except when the aim is child abuse. That is all I am saying.
 
Last edited:
Libertas-Mors said:
The best is when they hypocritically do it while sounding off about others doing it to groups whom they prefer.
Click to expand...

yep. its the same dishonest logic as:

all priest are child molesters
all gays are pedophiles
etc etc

its amazing how uneducated some people are

now of course one doesnt have to think everything is morally ok with another group but be honest about it and try to know what you are actually talking about before opening your mouth.
 
AGENT J said:
well with this single post you just proved how dishonest you are and how uneducated you are about polygamy.

I love when people draw blanket conclusion and judge a group based on some, its always an epic failure.
Click to expand...

Enlighten me then. Where are these other polygamists? If it isn't a religious cult thing I have no problem but aren't polygamist usually bible thumpers? You do have to admit those cults have given polygamy a bad name.

"Your" polygamists also have a serious PR problem. Try a google search on polygamy and see what comes up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom