Topic: It’s Time to Legalize Polygamy (Read 1437 times)

Most dispiriting, and least convincing, are those arguments that simply reconstitute the slippery slope arguments that have been used for so long against same sex marriage. “If we allow group marriage,” the thinking seems to go, “why wouldn’t marriage with animals or children come next?” The difference is, of course, consent. In recent years, a progressive and enlightened movement has worked to insist that consent is the measure of all things in sexual and romantic practice: as long as all involved in any particular sexual or romantic relationship are consenting adults, everything is permissible; if any individual does not give free and informed consent, no sexual or romantic engagement can be condoned.

This bedrock principle of mutually-informed consent explains exactly why we must permit polygamy and must oppose bestiality and child marriage. Animals are incapable of voicing consent; children are incapable of understanding what it means to consent. In contrast, consenting adults who all knowingly and willfully decide to enter into a joint marriage contract, free of coercion, should be permitted to do so, according to basic principles of personal liberty. The preeminence of the principle of consent is a just and pragmatic way to approach adult relationships in a world of multivariate and complex human desires.

Progressives have always flattered themselves that time is on their side, that their preferences are in keeping with the arc of history. In the fight for marriage equality, this claim has made again and again. Many have challenged our politicians and our people to ask themselves whether they can imagine a future in which opposition to marriage equality is seen as a principled stance. I think it’s time to turn the question back on them: given what you know about the advancement of human rights, are you sure your opposition to group marriage won’t sound as anachronistic as opposition to gay marriage sounds to you now? And since we have insisted that there is no legitimate way to oppose gay marriage and respect gay love, how can you oppose group marriage and respect group love?

I suspect that many progressives would recognize, would pushed in this way, that the case against polygamy is incredibly flimsy, almost entirely lacking in rational basis and animated by purely irrational fears and prejudice. What we’re left with is an unsatisfying patchwork of unconvincing arguments and bad ideas, ones embraced for short-term convenience at long-term cost. We must insist that rights cannot be dismissed out of short-term interests of logistics and political pragmatism. The course then, is clear: to look beyond political convenience and conservative intransigence, and begin to make the case for extending legal marriage rights to more loving and committed adults. It’s time.


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/gay-marriage-decision-polygamy-119469.html?cmpid=sf#ixzz3eBgtvUuQ

As if this has never happened before throughout history

Slavery was never returned after the violence to end slavery. Feudalism isn't making any comebacks either. Nor will monogamy, or capitalism when they fall to INTERNET + empathy.

As if this has never happened before throughout history... The walls crumble... Then it is rebuilt, then it goes down again... Over and over again. Nothing new.

Yes this is a common misunderstanding, and literally the ONLY valid argument that christians have against legalizing gay marriage.  But in reality there is no evedince that churches will be forced to marry gay people.  They just have to deal with other churches doing it if they so choose.

I think on the basic idea polygamy is ok, and there should be no problem with it.  But most of the time as mentioned above it is for unequal relationships.  Like in cults, and usually it involves minors too.  But it should be legal anyways, its like making piano wire illegal because someone used it to kill once before.  But anyway I think that people who want this lifestyle can have it, they just must have it "off the books", at least in america.

And don't get me started with muslims and how they treat their women, that is a whole other pandoras box.

I don't believe the marriage-equality issue is about forcing religious organisations to conduct marriages which are counter to their inherent bigotry.

AFAIK marriage-equality deals solely with the issue of ensuring that all US States have to conduct and recognise marriages between two people, irrespective of their gender. It is a legal issue of ensuring gay couples can have the same rights in marriage as heterosexual couples.

The law does not concern forcing religious organisations to conduct gay marriages. Unless you know otherwise.

I think if a fair amount of muslims start petitioning for it's legalization you'll see white liberals supporting the cause. If mormons want it however...

Same here. Paying rent in my city costs too much of my time to sustain multiple very intimate relationships, to say nothing of the rarity of compatible +young + mutually attractive +poly folk.

Everyone will be like this after a few more decades, the walls have already begun crumbling down for all the myths of religion, monogamy is simply the last one to go. 

I am in a monogamous relationship, but am polyamorous at heart.

Emboldened is the essence of polyamory. I only wish more people were like this.

How about this harm I already pointed out?

You see, coming up with vague notions of elements of polygamy which might not be harmful is not exactly useful in the presence of a reasoned fact of how polygamy is harmful.

Jealousy is the myth, compersion is true human nature.

Compersion

-The feeling of joy one has experiencing another's joy, such as in witnessing a toddler's joy and feeling joy in response.
-The feeling of joy associated with seeing a loved one love another; contrasted with jealousy.

It's kinda illegal in Turkey, But I've never heard that someone got punishment because of polygamy.
Islamic beliefs support that.

How it's done in Turkey?
1 wife is legal wife and others' marriage is in front of Allah (Imams makes those weddings).

Obviously Women don't have that right...

Is love = trust = myth = an obsolete concept of possession and control?

These are the countries which have legalized polygamy as of now (in black). Countries in light blue allow polygamy only for Muslim citizens, while polygamy is a criminal offence in the deep blue nations. In the Middle East, only the countries of Israel, Turkey and Tunisia does not allow polygamy. Polygamy is illegal everywhere in the Americas and the Europe.  :

The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

A book offering some insight into the inevitable future of human mating:

I don't know that it's a violation of the law, why would it be? First, I don't think any religious organization should have a tax exempt status, but nonetheless, I don't know how this has a bearing on the relevant circumstances of the situation. Taking a tax deduction doesn't make you an agent of the government.

The protection of rights is by the government, not individual organizations. I support gay marriage, but I don't support forcing any religious organization to perform a religious ceremony (and I, as an atheist, have no pony in that race. What religious organizations do privately affects me in no way.) Religious marriage and civil marriage are not the same, and this law should only be binding on civil marriage, and governments are the only institution involved in civil marriage.