One woman I don't get to sleep with bitching at me for not taking out the garbage is enough for me.
l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .
Considering the vast majority indulging in the practice are doing so as a product of a misogynistic culture where men are do dominant over their wives there can be no real "choice" involved from the female perspective due to all the societal pressures that support such a practice, it is clearly an illiberal institution that acts against liberal values.
I think marriage should only be between a man and woman.But if polygamy was legalized then there should be a mandated prenuptial agreement regarding who gets custody of the kids,visitation, and who pays alimony because I imagine that those would get extremely tricky in a polygamous family.l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .
Why would any sane man want to have more than one woman reminding him he forgot to put the seat down?
One good woman at a time is all I need.
Continuing Heinlein's speculation about unorthodox social and family structures, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress introduces the idea of a "line marriage". Mannie is part of a century-old line marriage, wherein new spouses are introduced by mutual consent at regular intervals so that the marriage never comes to an end. Divorce is rare, since divorcing a husband requires a unanimous decision on the part of all of his wives. Senior wives teach junior wives how to operate the family; granting financial security and ensuring that the children will never be orphaned. Children usually marry outside the line marriage, though this is not an ironclad rule. Mannie's youngest wife sports the last name 'Davis-Davis', showing she was both born and married into the line.
The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I support Heinlein's concept of line marriage.
l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .
No. Why don't you straighten me out with your facts and figures. No doubt there's a tidal wave of polygamy going on in America and I'm too busy amusing the cats to keep up with the dreadful plague.
Keep this up and before you know it gay people will be legalized and then where will we end up?
Polygamy has nothing to do with gay marriage.
Do try to keep up, o.k.?
l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .
l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .
I feel we should simplify things for all interests. Civil unions between any adults regardless of sex or number. If a family wants to consist of 3 men and 8 women, or 12 men and 2 women, ect. it should be between them. Simply require a written standard contract, prenup if you will, that covers any children or property rights between the individuals in case of separation or death.
Would it require permission from all the existing spouses, or can anyone change the terms of the existing contract without agreement from them?
Consensus of course.
Would it require permission from all the existing spouses, or can anyone change the terms of the existing contract without agreement from them?
Everyone involved would have to agree to any changes made within the agreement including the addition of new spouses.
The fact is, it's none of your business what consenting adults do with each other. You don't get to decide what's normal and what's not, then base laws off your opinions.
I don't see how they will escape it. The ratio of marriageable men to women has been thrown off so drastically.
It is the exact same argument being made against gay marriage. A man and a woman raising a child is the natural way of things, therefore we should ban gays getting married. Think of how much damage a gay couple could do to a poor little straight kid, right? Sound familiar?This has nothing to do with liberty. And I told you but lets counteranalyze your statement shall we. And then we get to the bottom of things.
You are saying that I bring the same arguments the anti-gay marriage people have.
Fine, you can say that but the cases are different.
But if you claim that what consenting adults do, its nobody's business, then you open the door to... incest. Brother and sister decide to get married and have incest. The reason we don't permit it is because there are harmful side effects. Not for them. They'll be fine. But for the children that will result of that... union. We don't permit it because it's messed up and it is an aberration proven by science. It is nothing to do with freedom or liberty. Or if you decide to make this, polygamy, about freedom and liberty for two consenting adults to do whatever they want, then you must provide the same argument and benefit for incest.
Let's go find a study that skinny parents raise better kids than fat ones. That should be a good reason to ban fat people getting married. Human history has shown that healthy parents have raised better kids, so we should use the force of the state to prevent them from marrying, right?Society cannot exist on unlimited freedom and liberty. There has never been a model of society that has existed that way because human nature desires limits. We need limitations as much as we need freedoms and liberties. There is a line in the sand that can't be crossed because you end up in a horrible, horrible place.
Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures « UBC Public Affairs
This is just one of many studies that show that monogamy is superior to polygamy. It is in our best interest, as a society, to promote it. And we don't have to do a lot of work in promoting monogamy really, it is the natural way of things. Most people are drawn to monogamy and desire it. It is a desirable thing.
I'm glad you know every person on the planet and their reasons for it. You run around talking about liberty and what not, but it's bull****. You only like liberty if it fits what you view is normal.The ones who want polygamy, don't really want polygamy, they just want to have affairs. And that's the catch, you can, in our society. Because as I said.
So to you it's actually not about the kids, because you admit that anyone could marry and divorce any amount of people as often as they like, or have sex with as many people as they like, married or not. The only thing that matters to you is that they can't be officially married to more than one person at a time. That makes it very obvious that it has nothing to do with the kids, you're just against anything that you find abnormal in society. You're simply arguing to preserve the classical definition of marriage, nothing more."Freedom and liberty come with the right for you to marry and divorce whomever you want as many times as you want. Freedom and liberty means that you can do adultery and not be criminally tried. Freedom and liberty have to do with you being able to not get married and have sex with multiple women and have illegitimate children and whatever. That is all freedom and liberty."
EDIT: Oh. And history and human nature proves me right in this because the freest nations in the world adopt monogamy as the standard. It is why polygamy only exists in places where there is a superior power to enforce it. Like state, religion, cult, etc.
Sure I do. We call that "representative government".
There are hardly further arguments to be made. These however are the sufficiently valid enough to not let this go ahead. History and human nature validate this claim and hence, it is the correct one.It is the exact same argument being made against gay marriage. A man and a woman raising a child is the natural way of things, therefore we should ban gays getting married. Think of how much damage a gay couple could do to a poor little straight kid, right? Sound familiar?
Incest is in another ballpark to consider it because it actually causes GENETIC issues. The only issues you can find is that you believe the kids won't be well adjusted. Personally, I'd rather see a kid with too many parents than not enough.
Let's go find a study that skinny parents raise better kids than fat ones. That should be a good reason to ban fat people getting married. Human history has shown that healthy parents have raised better kids, so we should use the force of the state to prevent them from marrying, right?
I'm glad you know every person on the planet and their reasons for it. You run around talking about liberty and what not, but it's bull****. You only like liberty if it fits what you view is normal.
So to you it's actually not about the kids, because you admit that anyone could marry and divorce any amount of people as often as they like, or have sex with as many people as they like, married or not. The only thing that matters to you is that they can't be officially married to more than one person at a time. That makes it very obvious that it has nothing to do with the kids, you're just against anything that you find abnormal in society. You're simply arguing to preserve the classical definition of marriage, nothing more.
You're positively no different than those who refuse to let gays marry. Every argument you've made has been identical.
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?