The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

View Poll Results: My view of polygamy is
Against - one to one unions only. 3 15.79%
Don't care - not my cups of tea, but hey, you can go right ahead. 14 73.68%
Pro - The more the merrier. 2 10.53%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-06-2006, 08:36 AM   #1
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
What about polygamy

Should polygamy be legal?
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 08:40 AM   #2
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibram
I'm against polygamy on a moral basis, but I think making it legal would be the right thing to do, as long as it's carefully checked for abuse and all the other assorted filth that often goes along with it. Having multiple spouses, okay. Abusing them or their children, NOT okay.
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 09:12 AM   #3
busterb
NSABFD
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MS. usa
Posts: 3,908
How it hell could you afford more than maybe one? While in Sumatra, you could have 4, if the others agreed! WTF!
__________________
I've haven't left very deep footprints in the sands of time. But, boy I've left a bunch.
busterb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 09:29 AM   #4
Novae
Art may imitate life, but life imitates T.V.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington. Coffeetown.
Posts: 27
In all honestly, I have no moral qualms with it. I don't personally understand the concept of three-way love (no pun meant at all), but if someone else does, far be it from me to deny them that.
Novae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 09:47 AM   #5
Happy Monkey
I think this line's mostly filler.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
HBO's Big Love shows the kind that should be legal (the main characters) and the type that shouldn't (the prophet).

An enclave community has a large danger of veering into child abuse for structural reasons. With a 50/50 gender ratio, and assuming a multiple women/one man structure, there will be intense competition for brides. Without constant vigilance, prospective brides will be picked up earlier and earlier, and prospective competition will be expelled.
__________________
_________________
|...............| We live in the nick of times.
| Len 17, Wid 3 |
|_______________| [pics]
Happy Monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 10:30 AM   #6
lumberjim
I can hear my ears
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 25,571
it should be legal. the government shouldn't litigate family structure. where it gets messy is inheritance, custody of children, and divorces. the courts can handle that, though.
__________________
This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality
Embrace this moment, remember
We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion ~MJKeenan
lumberjim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 10:36 AM   #7
mrnoodle
bent
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: under the weather
Posts: 2,656
Don't care. Nothing morally wrong with it, IMO, but it seems incredibly stupid in today's culture. Seems kind of a throwback. People can hardly make relationships work with one other person, why add more to the mix? Plus, the Mormon version has pedo and human trafficking overtones (kind of wish I had put "against" now).
__________________
Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh
mrnoodle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 01:29 PM   #8
9th Engineer
Bioengineer and aspiring lawer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 872
If you look back in history you can find all the pedophilia and arranged marriage stuff in normal marriage as well, we instituted laws to control it. The same thing will happen with polygamy, we'll just apply current laws to the new situation. I think most, if not all, of the legal problems can avoided by slashing government perks to married couples. It's not really in the governments juristiction anyway to say that some people deserve tax breaks just because they signed a form together.
We have the infastructure and laws in place to prevent couples from being driven into bankrupcy by a large family already, you just wont be able to have a lot of kids.
Again, I don't really feel the need to prove one side or the other on grounds other than legality and precident, which clearly says 'go ahead'.
__________________
The most valuable renewable resource is stupidity.
9th Engineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2006, 08:46 PM   #9
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
I know many women that would need several husbands to support them.
What, you weren't thinking of multiple husbands? Why not? Why always multiple wives?

Who the hell would want more than one mother-in-law, anyway?
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 02:45 AM   #10
rkzenrage
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
My problem with it is that it is too rife with "issues". Mainly in the US is it's possible misuse in business.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 03:15 AM   #11
Tonchi
Victim of gravity
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hiding in plain sight
Posts: 1,412
We are talking MARRIAGE or other legal union, right, not just keeping yourself a haram?

Sure, people can say there is nothing MORALLY wrong with it but what they really mean is there is nothing wrong with a MAN having multiple partners. Or brood mares, or handmaidens, or whatever use a man has for several/many women under his control. Nobody ever considers it in the light of giving women the same privilege, that would cause the collapse of civilization, bet on it. (One of my favorite quips is "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.") WHY doesn't any race, religion, or civilization want to deal with the idea of women being in a union with multiple males? THAT is the issue I have with "plural marriage". It is just another scam which victimizes women.
__________________
Everything you've ever heard about Fresno is true.
Tonchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 05:49 AM   #12
DanaC
We have to go back, Kate!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
I don't see that there should be legal sanction against people who choose that way of life. That said, most of what I've seen on tv, or read, about polygamy seems to be very much orientated around the male and his desires / needs. I get the impression of a very sexist system, where the man decides to take another wife and wife n01 better get used to the idea. I also get the impression from some of the more prominent proponents of polygamy, that it seems to promote intensely patriarchal systems, and the marrriage of young women to older men is common.

Of course, I may be totally wrong. The documentaries I've seen may have had a very narrow perspective on a much wider issue. But it does mean I have a negative gut feeling about polygamy. Shouldn't be illegal though.
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 06:12 AM   #13
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
Hey, I sure didn't say anything about the genders and ratios... As far as I'm concerned a lady can have as just as many spouses as a man can.
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 10:07 AM   #14
Sundae
polaroid of perfection
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibram
Hey, I sure didn't say anything about the genders and ratios... As far as I'm concerned a lady can have as just as many spouses as a man can.
Actually I always understood that polygamy referred to a man having more than one wife, and polyandry was a woman having more than one husband.

The online dictionaries do not seem to back this up though.

(edited to add - polygyny was the specific term for more than one wife - I assume that's where I got confused)
__________________
Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac

Last edited by Sundae; 11-07-2006 at 10:14 AM.
Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2006, 10:22 AM   #15
Happy Monkey
I think this line's mostly filler.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonchi
WHY doesn't any race, religion, or civilization want to deal with the idea of women being in a union with multiple males?
It's happened before, and if plural marriage were allowed in the US, there would be no restrictions on gender ratios. But many of the people in the US who would want to take advantage are from an extremely patriarchal and strict religion where the purpose of marriage is to generate children. Polygyny is much more efficient for that purpose than polyandry.
__________________
_________________
|...............| We live in the nick of times.
| Len 17, Wid 3 |
|_______________| [pics]
Happy Monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.