now, i'll start off by stating that i do not believe in polygamy, nor do i feel that i'd ever want anyone but one partner (in my case, a male partner). however, my opinions aside, should polygamy be made legal?

when considering the values of American politics and especially when considering the recent debate over gay marriage, one could make a case for the legality of polygamy in cases that aren't forcing underage female children into a marriage. essentially, the marriage between x number of consenting adults seems perfectly logical under the American values of liberty and freedom of choice, as well as the lack or rights being infringed upon.

SO, what do you think? please explain your reasoning, rather than declaring "it's disgusting!"

I don't see much of a problem with it. If all participants have given consent, then it should be alright.

As long as all the parties are able to consent and do so, I don't have a problem it. The problem comes out when the family can't support or raise the children well, which is pretty much possible in any sort of marriage

I really don't see why anyone would oppose persons engaging in a polygamous relationship. My opinion is the same that I have on gay marriage: what you do is none of my business and I have no right to tell you otherwise.

I entirely agree. I'll even go as far as to say that there is no reason against it other than the common "Eeeeew" tendency. That doesn't mean that I would be personally inclined to be so; it simply means that if some people are happy this way, so be it.

Just as the two posts above me, I honestly think that, something like this may be disgusting to some people, but if it makes you happy, why should we appose? I personally would never want to get into any polygamous activity, but there is really no reason to appose someone's decisions as long as it keeps them content. Same goes with homosexuality; why should anyone argue about something harmless that makes someone happy?

lol, no ....
I don't think it should be legal
That's only because I think that if you can't choose one then don't get married, you know?
If you don't want to settle just swing.
What's the point of sealing your life at all if you can just add more as they come along? lol
It just doesnt make sense at all.
Marriage is important to me, but it's important to me because there is one person in my life that I want to be completely sealed to away from the rest of the world forever.
I just don't see the point in Marriage if it's not singular.

Then don't get involved in a polygamous relationship. Simple as that. Just because you disagree with it, doesn't mean other people shouldn't have the right to participate in it.

Theres still no point in sealing yourself to someone if you can just invite friends to the party as you go along.

If polygamy became legal, wouldn't a man be able to go and marry another woman behind his wife's back (or vice versa)?

I feel like that could cause a lot of problems.

nope, since it would be a marriage between the 3, there would need to be consent from all parties involved. the third woman (or man) could not join the marriage without consent of both partners in the marriage.

in the end, i suppose it should be legal (if not abused by marrying 12 year olds, as is the practice in some states). i still find it morally questionable, but that "moral" is simply based off what society has taught me. i mean, if all 3 people (or however many) want to be united in matrimony, i don't see what should stop them.

i personally prefer my own limited 2-person relationship. but, as sick_boy said, i think of it as the same as gay marriage - should be allowed and if you don't want it, don't get one.

lol it kind of doesnt matter because it'll never ever happen. Maybe in like 2050 and we're geisers they'll start talking about it ... and then it'll be like gayy marriage and it'll just go on for years and nothing will happen there either.

So if somebody wants to be involved in polygamy, there's no point in it? There may not be a point in it for you, but there is for other people. I don't think you understand the term freedom very well.

she claims in my comments that:


and yet i haven't seen a shred of evidence. just hypothetical situations with her assumptions attached that "explain" her opinions....

polygamy would be "sealing" yourself to more than one person, this is true, however it would require all people in the existing marriage to be in agreement on the additional person.

i don't see where there's a "party" and lots of promiscuity involved.


in some cultures, polygamy is considered acceptable. i don't believe i should force my Western values onto anyone.

I found this video interesting as well.

the current polygamy found in america should NOT be allowed, for the most part. they have underage marriages with girls not being allowed a choice.

the polygamy that would be ok is CONSENTUAL.

and may i remind you that women could have multiple male partners, technically. meh, i still prefer 2-person relationships, i just don't think i should force my values on another.

Overall I don't have a problem with it.


BUT.....

There are way too many legal issues though. Such as insurance, employee benefits, medical decisions, credit issues (will one wife's bad credit ruin it for the other six wives?) social security (do all the widows get a benefit, or just the favorite?), divorce (do all have to consent to get rid of one wife? )

The legal issues need to be planned out before legalization can even be possible.

Yeah I know. I didn't mean to say that this part of polygamy is good or anything; I posted it because it gives a different point of view to this whole thing.
And yes I agree, the polygamy scandals in America should not be allowed. As the guy in the video describes, they forced rules and values on people in their church, and forced them to do the exact acts that make polygamy in the U.S questionable. I still believe that general polygamy is okay, not so much the type of polygamy in the sects in the U.S.

You said that polygamous relationships that force young girls into a marriage should not be legal, yet you also say you should not push your values on someone else.

While I agree that polygamous relationships involving young girls/boys should not be legal, but where do we draw the line for where we "push" our moral values on someone else?

i feel that 18 is the minimum age that one should be allowed to get married. at that age we can choose to vote, smoke, join the military, and be a legal adult (for the most part).

by requiring the age of 18, i feel that you can inhibit it. while i do believe that my personal morals shouldn't be enforced on another, there is a difference between that. girls at such a young age can NOT make that sort of decision for themselves.

hehe, i'm in a politics of multiculturalism class, and we discuss this sort of stuff all the time.

I also agree that girls under eighteen should not be getting married. Just wanted to ask where we draw that line.

And I can tell; you know your stuff.

it's always a tough call on where to draw a line, but i think we can all agree that there needs to be a line drawn.

and thanks

I just found out on TV today, there will be something on Oprah (yes Oprah) about the polygamy sect. I think she talks to the women.

Yeah, hammering out the legal aspects is alot more complicated than trying to control the moral standpoint. I guess that the companies that ensure and hire persons in a polygamous relationship would have to negotiate with the parties involved in order to reach a middle ground.

She's right. The unique character of marriage and love, as it's set in Western society, is completely messed up with polygamy. Marriage is more than an indivdual choice, it's a central aspect in social life. Society has to cange its views on basic things to make polygamy happen.



Indeed. The benefit of looking like an absolutely free, tolerant nation is too poor regarding all the effort making polygamy legal. That's why it won't become legal.

It's funny how people by now even get tolerant towards a central point of Western criticism in the Muslim world. Of course it's legal not only in Muslim states and it's mostly characterized by men's supremacy over there but the public opinion goes in this direction and usually, people are horrified by this idea.

I haven't really formed an opinion on it though. I'm afraid people will just marry one another for the sake of tax breaks. Also a situation in which 3, 4, 0r 10 parents are raising children can potentially harm them. I don't know, are there really that many people who want to marry more than one person anyway? I'm curious to hear people's opinion in this issue!

WTF!?!?!? That was Random

No it wasn't...?
If you're not mature enough for this discussion, leave.

Very good question!

No, that's a horrible question. It doesn't matter how many people want to do it. People still should have the RIGHT to.

Oh, I think it does matter. If there's no-one who wants to marry several people, why should we even talk about it? Polygamy means the transformation of our moral/value system. It's not easy to initiate liberties randomly, at all! It's also not a question of the president's despotism if it will work or not. In my eyes, polygamy just isn't relevant in our society.

If there's nobody that wants to marry several people, then why would this even be a topic or an issue? If nobody wanted to be involved, we wouldn't hear about it in our day-to-day lives. And morals aren't universal.

You misunderstood me. I'm talking about different societies. There are countries where polygamy is legal but their specific society may have specific justifications and needs to do so. Our Western society does not imply such a justification, the only one is freedom maybe but this general term isn't sufficient to allow a specific issue like polygamy.

I mean, think about it. We have love songs with meaningful lines as "You're the only one" etc. That alone implies that polygamy isn't even relevant in the U.S. and other Western states.

And? Even if only 5 people want to do it, they should still have the freedom. The popularity of something shouldn't affect whether it's legal or not.
And to get off topic, lyrics like "You're the only one" tend to be incredibly generic and unmeaningful...but whatever.

5 people? Seriously? You should only change things that are defective in a common understanding, otherwise it's totally useless. As a politician you can't take every single desire into account, especially if it's associated with major changes.



It's not "the popularity", it's the social need that is missing in this case.

Marriage is not a private, random thing, it's a covenant in front of God and/or the state. That's why changes regarding that must require an urgent social occassion, with more than 5 people involved. It does not.



It's not off topic and it only seems to be meaningless because it's used so often. That rather proves my point.

A covenant in front of god, eh? Does that mean gay marriage shouldn't be allowed either?
but whatever, I'm done here. This isn't going anywhere.

You think I'm a fanatic Christian? Once and for all: I'm not. I'm just trying to consider everything.

There are enough homosexuals in our society who should be considered but there are very few people who actually fight for having the right to marry three people.

But you don't understand my point, no matter what I'm saying, yet you're acting as if you're a genius.

Edit: So my point is that domestic politics means (among others) reacting on social drawbacks, assuming there's a considerable number of people who are unjustifiably discriminated. I don't see a social drawback regarding monogamy and I don't see any benefit in allowing polygamy.

Honesty, I think this is a topic that you could argue until your face turns blue due to the several different stand points that we have based on how we were raised and the morals that we have.

I feel that if we were to legalize polygamy we should also leaglize gay marriage because if we're allowing a group of people to marry whom they please and how they please, then what right would we have to still discriminate against a group of people who have been fighting for years to gain that privilage?

For a country based on freedom, we sure do like to try to dictate to people on how they can live their lives, who they can marry and what they can do. It's becoming a dictatorship hypocracy, and it's ridiculous.

All in all, I think that we should allow people to live their lives how they please because it doesn't effect us in the least. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean anything.

I may not agree that the color purple is the best color on the face of the planet, but I'm not going to hate those who love the color purple and tell them they're wrong, ya know?

I'd wouldn't oppose a polygamous civil union but I think no as far as marriage goes. I am of the same opinion for homosexual marriage. It is because (correct me if I am wrong) marriage was a religious institution defined specifically as the eternal union between one man and one woman. Do I think society should be exclusive? No. So I think there should be an equivalent system (ie civil unions with the same legal rights etc) for polygamous and homosexual relationships. That way there is no religious conflict, but everyone is allowed their freedoms and liberties to choose.

no way ... i really almost candied myself up there ....
someone ... someone agreed with me! on a smosh.com forum
there is one other smart person ... in this world ... other than me ...
:]

ps ... there sno way to HAVE evidence on this subject ... so you can shut yo trap holmes ...
on the topic of gay people ... my point was extremely knowledgable adn misunderstood because everyones bias ... because they hate me

We hate you, BritnyyFox, because you say nothing but BILGE.
Sewage water and bilge.
It's rank, murky, and I don't want to look at it too much.
And when I do actually take a look, because I feel like maybe I should consider your opinion, I see that OH! it is ACTUALLY just crap in some water.

I think blah-de-blah, consenting adults should potentially have the right to marry more than one person, but Western society is too monogamy-based for it really to work right now. I'm not saying it shouldn't work in the future, but our minds are attuned in a certain way and our laws are set out in a certain way.
As far as actual love and stuff goes, I find it hard to believe that someone can be in love with more than one person at a time, and love is the reason for most Western marriages, in my view. So I consider, from this standpoint, polygamy impossible to not only practice, but also maintain.

An incredibly wishy-washy answer but hey that's the kind of person I am.

Well, the only reason i'd practice polygamy is if my wife can't get kids or so...
But obviously ill have to treat them equally and candy but... hey.. It risks a lot, jealousy between your two wifes and children from them...So if your willing to get headaches.. do it..

If several consenting adults want several partners thats their own bussiness.
I only object if its only acceptable for one gender
e.g. men have many wives, while women are allowed only one husband(any gay people out there please excuse me for only referencing it in a heterosexual model)

Although there children have the right to know who there dad is with out going into the DNA fuss.

marriage was originally defined as a man owning a woman as property. the definition has already evolved and should continue to do so. it has since allowed for divorce, women to be considered equals in marriage, women being allowed to INITIATE divorce, interracial marriage, etc...all have been considered at one point or another in the past to have been unacceptable for the term marriage.

but giving homosexuals only civil unions, you're simply giving them "separate but equal" institutions. as in American history, there were black schools and white schools (and bathrooms...and restaurants), and it was considered "equal" because the blacks were given similar opportunities, but it truly is not equal regardless, not unless they are given the same name, definition, and meaning.

may i remind you that marriage, although it can be performed in a church, is a GOVERNMENTAL institution. it is recognized as a legal document, and even my grandparents were MARRIED in a courthouse. due to these reasons along with the American notion (since i am arguing from an American perspective) that "all men are created equal" and also our guaranteed rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", i see no reason why homosexuals should not have EXACTLY the same opportunities as their fellow hetero citizens.

does it actually harm a religious person for gay people to get "married" by the government? NO.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/172653

^^ sorry, it became about gay marriage. but the same thoughts apply to polygamy as well.

i agree that they should know, but i don't see how anyone has a "right" to know.


no one hates you, but YOU are bias. and your points have never been valid.

who actually agreed with you? most people who "agree" with you have legitimate reasons. not say 2 different, contradicting "facts" withing one post (such as your post about "bisexuality being not normal....everyone is a little bicurious" etc.)

Surely the issue is with religion because it's generally christian countries where polygamy is illegal, I don't know if it's mentioned in the bible but i would imagine it was. So for poligamy to work in western countries all laws would have to become pretty much completely non-secular, which i don't see happening especially in the u.s. Personally though i don't have a problem with polligamy probably because i'm not religous so don't hold that much value in marriage.

eh.
religion practiced by other people affecting other people's choices is bull.

Every time i make a joke or am sarcastic at all ... I get my ass kicked.
About being bicurious ... it's from south park
which is my love.
I don't think I qualify as bias because it's my opinion isn't it?
Of course I'm fighting for my opinion ...
No one on this forum will ever open their mind for 10 seconds on ANY post I make ... just because it's me.

No, I think that marriage should be a sacred thing. You only marry someone if you want 2 spend the rest of ur life with them. I suppose that could be more than one person but it just seems wrong!!!!!