Polygamy (multiple wives) is it bad?

[cchristianTP]

By polygamy i mean in itself. but you can include the things asociated with it (marrying 20 7 year olds)
and I don't care about your justifications either, they can be morality. (but i want to hear them)

I would say my opinion, but i don't want to bias the topic on the first post.

[Aliotroph?]

Polygamy could work but the way people do it is usually just an excuse for their own sick power game.

[cchristianTP]

yeah, but it leaves so much space of the ability to do bad things, it's Immoral, and leads to mare immorlity.
(just to throw in some argument for the other side)

Did anyone hear that they [the FBI] got that occult leader that had 40 wives, half of which were 7-16?

[Yagisan]

Polygamy can work, but there are a rather lot of practical problems with it, e.g. favouritism etc.

Any man that has had a relationship with a woman (sorry cchristianTP - perhaps when you're older ;) ) understands PMS - do you really want to be there when they *all* go off at once ? There are easier ways to kill yourself that hurt less.

[Nomad]

I could probably only practice polygamy if I found that I really loved more than one woman (or man--I don't descriminate), and only then if they were comfortable with it as well. However, I am happy with only wone partner. To each his own.

But Yagisan is correct in that favoritism surely becomes a problem. Let's face it--women are jealous (but to be fair, us guys are jealous too, of course), and may not appreciate you spending more time with the other than with them. But in a situation where everyone is already in agreeance, I'm sure arrangements can be made without much problem.

At any rate, I'm a firm believer that love comes in all shapes and sizes, so whatever floats your boat--as long as everyone involved understands what's going on and is OK with it.

[g6672D]

Yeah those Portable Missile Systems sure do go off with a bang. :)

I'm not too sure I'd want Polygamy to be legalized simply because of the ideals of marriage. You don't split your attention between two people. And as Alio commented, people would be likely to abuse the right if it existed. Other than that, there'd be a public outcry from certain religions as well. Look at same-sex marriage debates.

EDIT: By the way, cool avatar Nomad!

[xbolt]

YES. IT'S BAD. Any more questions, buddy?
Marrige. One man. One woman. PERIOD.

Read my post in another thread that you started recently, do a little research, and lets see if you're smart enough to figure out why.

[KuriKai]

I agree with xbolt.
All I want is one woman to love and to be loved by.

[Nomad]

I'm not too sure I'd want Polygamy to be legalized simply because of the ideals of marriage. You don't split your attention between two people. And as Alio commented, people would be likely to abuse the right if it existed. Other than that, there'd be a public outcry from certain religions as well. Look at same-sex marriage debates.

NO. No, no, no, no, NO! Religion should have NO bearing on law--period. Religion, especially one that I do not subscribe to, has NO right to tell me who I can love, nor how many people I can love.

If you do not wish to love more than on person, that is perfectly fine. No one would force you to. And I can relate! I really have no desire to love more than on person myself. But your personal beliefs and convictions should not dictate others'. This is love we're talking about--and by outlawing such things as same-sex marriage, or polygamy, you are effectively making love a crime.

However, I can understand that the current political system in place in our country does not account for polygamy in the tax breaks and shit, and may be problematic in introducing such a subject. But, of course, because all of the fucking Christians in the country, such a thing would never even be attempted, since they're too busy oppressing others' beliefs and ideals...

EDIT: By the way, cool avatar Nomad!

Thanks. I made it myself. ;P

[cchristianTP]

Well now. Flip it around.
It dosn't neccesarilly mean two WIVES
what about 2or3 or even 10 husbands?

and BTW, just because it's legal dosn't mean everyone HAS to do it.
Whay not just say you can if you wan't to? some of you are getting away from the point, it's not about "should we all do it" it's about "Should it be legal"

Right now it's somewhat decriminalized, the punishment is a fine and required anullment.

[Nomad]

As long as everyone involved knows what is going along, and is OK with it, there is nothing wrong with it. I will continue repeating this as needed.

[cchristianTP]

I should take a second to note, one of the reasons for my opinion:
While Illegal, Polygamy usually crosses with; sex with minors, oppression of wemen, massive occultism, and all that other stuff that that Occult leader was doing + more

[Nomad]

There's a difference between some psycho jackass running a cult and someone who wants to marry more than one person whom he or she loves. A BIG difference.

[cchristianTP]

My thoughts exactly BUT when you break the law to marry two people whats to stop you from doing other bad things?

[Nomad]

If it weren't against the law, it wouldnt' be a problem, now, would it.

[cchristianTP]

WHICH LEADS ME TO MY WELL THOUGHT OPINION!

I think that we should Legalize Polygamy BUT there should be no sort of accomedation for those who choose to practice;
-you get one tax break for your first marraige
-they are all seperate (unless the two wives marry each other)
-the wife must be able to agree or give a reason why you shouldn't in court
-There is no legal differnce from your first or second spouse

Whats so important about legalizing? REGULATION, now instead of occults dedicated to marrying 100 10 year old girls, we get smaller occults about marrying 10 yeard olds [singular] and there is no "i broke this law, let's break more!"

But PLEASE disagree with me! i need debate!

[Aliotroph?]

Exactly. I like it when people can't think of any reason not to do something except that someone wrote a law against it. Laws have purposes and if those purposes can be shown to be unworthy, irrelevent, non-applicable, stupid, or unworkable then the laws need to go. Fortunately most laws don't fall into that category.

Polygamy can work, even if the instances where it would truly be happy are few and far between. Marriage is like that anyway. :p

Nomad is again correct about religion; those of us who don't follow it are tired of having those who do push their morals on us with fines, jail time, etc, etc.

[cchristianTP]

and, just because the couple (or should i say throng) might not be happy isn't a good argument, there are unhappy traditional marriages, we should make that illegal?

[Nomad]

Aliotroph is agreeing with you, stupid. And for once, I actually agree as well.

[cchristianTP]

I wasn't arguing with her.
Just rebuttleing some older points of "They won't be happy!"

It's really a pointless law.

BUT:
We are in line for some OPPOSITION here!
Unless we all agree...
(I want to get some serious debates going... after all that is what half of this forum is for)

[Nomad]

Aliotroph is a man.

[Aliotroph?]

Another one fooled! *drum roll* :D I never thought I talked like a woman. *crazy*

[Nomad]

No, I'm pretty sure that cchristianTP is just an idiot. But your having Wynona in your avatar doesn't help. :P

[xbolt]

We are in line for some OPPOSITION here!

What am I? Chopped liver?

I'm pretty sure that cchristianTP is just an idiot
I agree. He says he's looking for opposition, but he's apparently too stupid to see it when it's right there in front of him.

[cchristianTP]

oh... cut it.
srry aliotroph.
and where is the opposition?

[xbolt]

IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU IDIOT!!

Okay, I'll make it easier for you. Now look closely:

MARRIGE IS BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN. PERIOD.
SO HAVING MULTIPLE WIVES (OR HUSBANDS) IS BAD.

Now, if you don't see this, my opinion level of you will hit rock bottom so hard, it wont stop until it reaches the earth's core.

[CrazedImp]

I like what KuriKai and Xbolt say, one person in my life and thats all you need. No need for Polygamy.

[Yagisan]

If it makes all those involved happy - then I think they should enjoy it. I can see no valid reason that it should be forbidden between informed consenting adults.

That said, I am only interested in my wife, and no other.

[Nomad]

If it makes all those involved happy - then I think they should enjoy it. I can see no valid reason that it should be forbidden between informed consenting adults.

That said, I am only interested in my wife, and no other.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I've been saying.

[Aliotroph?]

Exactly. Methinks we need an atheist republic. ;)

[Nomad]

I dont' know about athiest, but one completely unbiased to religion anyway.

[cchristianTP]

I think theyve got my opinion, IT DOSN'T MATTER WHAT YOU WANT.
If you don't want multiple wives, you don't have to have them?
Do you understand this? do you feel Threatened by the idea?

And to restate my earlier point, If we made it legal then we would stp the REAL crimes that are usually related to it from being a problem.

BUT, I must once again remind you: YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO IT, BUT YOU CAN. It's like Gay Marraige, I COULD go into a civil union with another man, But I don't Wan't to, So I won't.
YOU have NO RIGHT to force your Personal Opinion/Ideals based rules on others, only yourself.
Unless you can point out a Real Physical Harm, NOT some "I think it should be illegal because I don't think it's moral/what I wan't other people to do" Argument.

[CrazedImp]

Why do you come here and talk like you think you have some kind of authority?

[FATAL]

Well trying to debate while being too humble gets no one nowhere. Christian's post wasn't really bad. You need to lay off the excessive bashing, at least for a moment, Crazed Imp.

[Yagisan]

Well trying to debate while being too humble gets no one nowhere. Christian's post wasn't really bad. You need to lay off the excessive bashing, at least for a moment, Crazed Imp.I suspect he (like many others) isn't too happy with cchristianTP's antics in general and his constant spamming and is just blowing off steam. It will clear over soon.

[FATAL]

Yeah, I know the feeling.

I'm sure Christian would be a much better community member if he were more careful with taking others into consideration as well. Right now he lacks respect, both from and to others.

[rustyslacker]

I dont' know about athiest, but one completely unbiased to religion anyway.
Heh. Good luck with that. America is supposed to be that way (separation of church and state), but isn't.

[Nomad]

No. "Separation of Church and State" just means that there is not to be anything resembling a "Church of America," much like England's "Church of England." It does not mean that religious beliefs cannot influence the laws in the country, unfortunately. So long as it doesn't violate freedom of religion, they can do whatever the fuck they want.

[Aliotroph?]

Letting religion influence your laws does violate freedom of religion. If someone's religion governs laws that control what I do then I'm not free from their religion.

I like what KuriKai and Xbolt say, one person in my life and thats all you need. No need for Polygamy.

That's nice that you like to live like them. Just don't go imposing that view on everyone else. Xbolt is using a standard Christian definition of marriage. Some of us disagree on that being a good definition. Personally I'd only like one wife (max) too, but I'm happy to let my friends have more if they want.

[jetflock]

I have 3 wives. I would be more comfortable with 5 though.

[Doom-Dork]

I have 3 wives. I would be more comfortable with 5 though.

Looking at your avatar, jetflock, are you sure it isn't 3 husbands. *roflmao*

[jetflock]

Looking at your avatar, jetflock, are you sure it isn't 3 husbands. *roflmao*
clever. just remember who you are quoting in your signature though.
besides, i only mentioned my wives, i didn't say anything about my husbands.

[Falci]

I wouldn't mind poligami being legalized... but, really, one woman gives already enough trouble for an entire life. :P

[rustyslacker]

I wouldn't mind poligami being legalized... but, really, one woman gives already enough trouble for an entire life. :P
It wouldn't be a big deal if not for the weirdos marrying 12-year-old girls.

[Nomad]

That would still be illegal, though. :)

[CSlyr Cthulhu]

Yeah, there's a difference between Polygamy and Pedophilia. And aren't mormons the only polygamists?

[rustyslacker]

The only ones that get any publicity, anyhow.

[g6672D]

I thought that Muslims were allowed to as well though. At least, it was implied somewhere when I was reading "The Book Of Heroic Failures" regarding someone who was divorced twice in 15 minutes.

[Aliotroph?]

Yeah, muslims can do that -- at least certain denominations can.

[jetflock]

Beastiality is legal in NJ.

[Nomad]

It is in Wyoming too. You just can't admit it in public, or get caught in the act (both of which fall under indecent exposure and shit like that). But the actual act is apparantly legal.

[rustyslacker]

What brought this up? *squint*

[cary123]

i dont know

[rustyslacker]

Cary:

http://img349.imageshack.us/img349/8692/fail3ir.jpg

You fail at life.

[Nomad]

http://failing.istheshit.net/

[rustyslacker]

<3 <3 <3

Thanks Nomad.

[+Acyclitor+]

And aren't mormons the only polygamists?what a Morman told me was that they do not practice it anymore, but did for a time after settling in Salt Lake City because there were fewer men than woman and they needed a population boost.
i haven't cared enough to go look it up myself.

anyway, in general i think Polygamy should be legal.

[rustyslacker]

I think Islam supports some sort of polygamy. Any Muslims out there too confirm/deny this?

[cary123]

i think it sould depend of the persons religon same with gay/lesben marrage

[Pieter Enis]

Religion and law should have nothing to do with one another
The only reason I can think of the church has this much power over marriage is because most people take the wedding in a church and the legislational wedding to be the same thing. (Or however you Engrish-users out there say that, you get the point, don't you?)

My image of "the herd" still goes: A group of people supporting a histerical, closed-minded old lady (ladies get histerical more often) and doing everything she says so as to 'protect' her.
Thats my image of people. Mostly deeply religious people though.
But that led to the incessant bickering about gay marriage. Who cares about it? Just let them wed. Geez.
If people want 50 wives/husbands, and the other party(ies) agree ... then what's there to stop them from becoming happy?
...
The histerical, closed-minded old lady is

PS Is histerical spelled right?

[rustyslacker]

No, it's not spelled right. Histerical != Hysterical.

[Kuwabara]

(Wow,it's been a while since i was here.)

My two cents:I am not a fan of it at all,and i hope it does not become legal.even if it did become legal i would not do it,otherwise people will think "Well of COURSE he would do it! He's Morman!" (Local LDS here)

[Nomad]

I don't get why everyone seems to think that if polygamy is legal, they HAVE to do it. Get real.

[jetflock]

this place is stupid.

[Pieter Enis]

I don't get that when people don't like something, they HAVE to illegalise it. Get real.

PS: Thank you Rusty, for improving my vocabulary
PPS: And jetflock, many places are stupid, you just have to find which kind of stupidity suits you best

[Nomad]

I don't get that when people don't like something, they HAVE to illegalise it. Get real.

Who is that directed at?

[Aliotroph?]

Probably Kuwabara. I suspect that if it were legal most people still wouldn't do it. Rather like gay marriage. The conservatives on that one are being retarded because they think they have some kind of monopoly on marriage. Then half the gays are being retarded beause they think we should force priests to marry them. Sorry guys, but churches are really private social clubs and if you don't like the rules go find your own club!

People who want to make things illegal because they don't like them are often the same type of people who think if you read or even hear about an opposite opinion you will be converted to it. Those people like to ban books.

I don't get why jetflock just keeps appearing to say something is stupid with no qualifiers. :p

[Pieter Enis]

Who is that directed at?

No-one in particular, I was imitating you and bashing Religion at the same time

Probably Kuwabara. I suspect that if it were legal most people still wouldn't do it. Rather like gay marriage. The conservatives on that one are being retarded because they think they have some kind of monopoly on marriage. Then half the gays are being retarded beause they think we should force priests to marry them. Sorry guys, but churches are really private social clubs and if you don't like the rules go find your own club!
Now that you mention it, it IS rather silly that gay people insist upon legalising marriage. I guess it's more a principle thing though.

People who want to make things illegal because they don't like them are often the same type of people who think if you read or even hear about an opposite opinion you will be converted to it. Those people like to ban books.
I'll keep this plain and simple, whilst supporting you, don't worry:
Free and all acces to any and all information found, ever, future or past or present. Don't have that and you're bound to have some people forming a group, hating some minority because they are misinformed.
Plus, afterwards they can't blame the system for blocking acces to the information they needed to inform themselves properly or misinforming them, it's their responsability.
Im going from the idea that you'd want to free information? I d'no.

I don't get why jetflock just keeps appearing to say something is stupid with no qualifiers. :p
Nothing to add here *weird* Man, am I glad that smiley still works, phew