POLL: Should polygamy be legalized?

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
Doesn't polygamy also imply a wife may have multiple husbands?

now you're talking.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen
Even without the moral implications. The way society is now, society would not function as well if men had to juggle more than one family. It would be a slow progression to more civil unrest. Although I have heard that genetically women with more absent mates tend to give birth to girls because they are easier to care for. So the gender ratio if done would then start to favor multiple wives. But I disagree with the principle (disregarding any moral implications) because with our society as it is set up now, most people could not function very well juggling more than one family. Society wouldn't collapse, as some may think, but it would cripple it at least.

the divorce rate has many ppl already with multiple families where have u been.

But it is not as frequent. And the amount of people who divorce (mostly people divorce within their first year) do not have kids. Actually if we talk about the crippling amount of people having multiple kids, it is within the poor that this is happening.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen
Even without the moral implications. The way society is now, society would not function as well if men had to juggle more than one family. It would be a slow progression to more civil unrest. Although I have heard that genetically women with more absent mates tend to give birth to girls because they are easier to care for. So the gender ratio if done would then start to favor multiple wives. But I disagree with the principle (disregarding any moral implications) because with our society as it is set up now, most people could not function very well juggling more than one family. Society wouldn't collapse, as some may think, but it would cripple it at least.

You make it sound as if the moment its legalized it will become widespread. Aside from the fact this is numerically impossible it would require both sexes to endorse it enmass...something that is highly unlikely to happen.

Very logical point, but if you allow for pockets of the society to break down (and I guarantee that if legalized communities would pocket or pull together), it would cause a crippling effect on parts of society. It wouldn't make a major blow though, but why do it if it would cause societal issues.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
Doesn't polygamy also imply a wife may have multiple husbands?

now you're talking.

It certainly does mean that, even if many people don't see that side of it. In fact, group families are possible, where there are multiple wives and husbands coexisting, which leads to interesting possibilities. (Read Heinlein's Future History stories for ideas.)

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

But the amounts of violations of those laws increase in those types of closed communities as the polygamist communities. And most of the kids who are victimized never get out of the situation.

Since my work involves tracking and dealing with these people (predators that is), I know a little about the situation.

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

But the amounts of violations of those laws increase in those types of closed communities as the polygamist communities. And most of the kids who are victimized never get out of the situation.

Since my work involves tracking and dealing with these people (predators that is), I know a little about the situation.

Its legal status and the fact its different from the norm really put the spotlight on it. Does crime not occur elsewhere? You also have to understand that stigmatized practices will attract a very different crowd from legitimized ones. The fundamental issue is that it's not ok to legislate morality, no matter the perceived result. And about the perceived result - throughout history, people trying to predict the future / the results of untested laws & experiments have been, by and large, laughably wrong. What makes you think you know better?

 

[jemcam]

I voted yes but I think someone would have to be fvcking crazy to have more than one wife. One is bad enough.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
Anyway... the REAL reason why polygamy is currently not legal (and not going to become legal anytime soon) is because there is a roughly equal proportion of males and females in the US. Polygamous marriages most frequently occur in environments in which there is biological need. If something causes a shortage in one sex or other (typically war, which is why polygyny is the most common form of polygamy throughout history), then the other sex will agree to share in order to improve each individual's chances of reproduction.

That may be the reason it's not common in the United States, but is it really the reason why it's illegal? I would think it was outlawed for moral reasons, same as other alternative relationships.

Ah, I was waiting for this excellent question to come up.

Because an individual with multiple spouses does harm others, albeit indirectly (and insufficiently to be a law IMO). He reduces their chances of finding a mate to reproduce with. Less to go around and all that. A man with 12 wives means 11 other men go without.

On the moralist side, polygamy and homosexual marriages are completely unrelated. As far as I've always been concerned, 2 gay men mean 2 more women for the rest of us.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: RBachman

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

But the amounts of violations of those laws increase in those types of closed communities as the polygamist communities. And most of the kids who are victimized never get out of the situation.

Since my work involves tracking and dealing with these people (predators that is), I know a little about the situation.

Its legal status and the fact its different from the norm really put the spotlight on it. Does crime not occur elsewhere? You also have to understand that stigmatized practices will attract a very different crowd from legitimized ones. The fundamental issue is that it's not ok to legislate morality, no matter the perceived result. And about the perceived result - throughout history, people trying to predict the future / the results of untested laws & experiments have been, by and large, laughably wrong. What makes you think you know better?

Point taken. But that still doesn't take into account the fact that in the countries that practice polygamy (ancient greece, modern day afghanistan, parts of india...), pedophilia aren't even considered anything seriously twisted. Older men will take little girls for wives, or the parents will sell their daughter for dowry to some horny bastard. But in these areas, it isn't frowned upon at all. Evil happens, but it seems there is a correlation here. Not saying there is, but it looks that way.

If you don't believe in a government that legistates civil ethics (morals not tied to religion to benefit society), then you should move to a more laissez-faire country. It is a total misconception to believe that governments shouldn't legislate morality. If that was the case robbing, killing,... all would be legitamized. Ridiculous. As long as the civil ethics is fair and unbiased as possible, government should indeed legislate ethics. I disagree with someof the things being done right now in our country with our government legislating morals, but that is because it is not unbiased civil ethics.

It isn't neccesary that I know better than people about this situation. All I am pointing out is that there seems to be a good reason as to why polygamy is outlawed in this country. And it isn't a religious reason that I presented. And it has been tested by overall society. Why do you think that most "civilized" countries do not allow polygamy anymore? It throws society off balance. England, Japan, Taiwan..., all civilized non-religious societies which have outlawed this practice. Why? Because it doesn't work. There is empirical evidence by the structuring of the societies. It seems like most people don't think about this situation before saying "yes" it is a good thing. They think with their "wangs" and not their "brains".

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: DaShen
Point taken. But that still doesn't take into account the fact that in the countries that practice polygamy (ancient greece, modern day afghanistan, parts of india...), pedophilia aren't even considered anything seriously twisted. Older men will take little girls for wives, or the parents will sell their daughter for dowry to some horny bastard. But in these areas, it isn't frowned upon at all. Evil happens, but it seems there is a correlation here. Not saying there is, but it looks that way.

Corellation =/= causation. There are countless factors in the corellation.

If you don't believe in a government that legistates civil ethics (morals not tied to religion to benefit society), then you should move to a more laissez-faire country. It is a total misconception to believe that governments shouldn't legislate morality. If that was the case robbing, killing,... all would be legitamized. Ridiculous. As long as the civil ethics is fair and unbiased as possible, government should indeed legislate ethics. I disagree with someof the things being done right now in our country with our government legislating morals, but that is because it is not unbiased civil ethics.

Big, big difference between practices which directly and adversely affect others and ones which don't. If I didn't clarify sufficiently - I'm doing so here.

Originally posted by: Vic
Ah, I was waiting for this excellent question to come up.

Because an individual with multiple spouses does harm others, albeit indirectly (and insufficiently to be a law IMO). He reduces their chances of finding a mate to reproduce with. Less to go around and all that. A man with 12 wives means 11 other men go without.

On the moralist side, polygamy and homosexual marriages are completely unrelated. As far as I've always been concerned, 2 gay men mean 2 more women for the rest of us.

I don't follow the logic; the women are exercising personal choice. But I'm all for legislating against this; the celebration on ATOT would be legendary :laugh:

It isn't neccesary that I know better than people about this situation. All I am pointing out is that there seems to be a good reason as to why polygamy is outlawed in this country. And it isn't a religious reason that I presented. And it has been tested by overall society. Why do you think that most "civilized" countries do not allow polygamy anymore? It throws society off balance. England, Japan, Taiwan..., all civilized non-religious societies which have outlawed this practice. Why? Because it doesn't work. There is empirical evidence by the structuring of the societies. It seems like most people don't think about this situation before saying "yes" it is a good thing. They think with their "wangs" and not their "brains".

No, because it's politically and economically most advantageous to copycat the US.

 

[FoBoT]

so the consensus seems to be that if the movement to change the legal definition of marriage from a man and a woman to 2 men or 2 woman succeeds, it will completely open up the legal avenues to getting polygamy legalized as well

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: RBachman

Originally posted by: DaShen
Point taken. But that still doesn't take into account the fact that in the countries that practice polygamy (ancient greece, modern day afghanistan, parts of india...), pedophilia aren't even considered anything seriously twisted. Older men will take little girls for wives, or the parents will sell their daughter for dowry to some horny bastard. But in these areas, it isn't frowned upon at all. Evil happens, but it seems there is a correlation here. Not saying there is, but it looks that way.

Corellation =/= causation. There are countless factors in the corellation.

If you don't believe in a government that legistates civil ethics (morals not tied to religion to benefit society), then you should move to a more laissez-faire country. It is a total misconception to believe that governments shouldn't legislate morality. If that was the case robbing, killing,... all would be legitamized. Ridiculous. As long as the civil ethics is fair and unbiased as possible, government should indeed legislate ethics. I disagree with someof the things being done right now in our country with our government legislating morals, but that is because it is not unbiased civil ethics.

Big, big difference between practices which directly and adversely affect others and ones which don't. If I didn't clarify sufficiently - I'm doing so here.

Originally posted by: Vic
Ah, I was waiting for this excellent question to come up.

Because an individual with multiple spouses does harm others, albeit indirectly (and insufficiently to be a law IMO). He reduces their chances of finding a mate to reproduce with. Less to go around and all that. A man with 12 wives means 11 other men go without.

On the moralist side, polygamy and homosexual marriages are completely unrelated. As far as I've always been concerned, 2 gay men mean 2 more women for the rest of us.

I don't follow the logic; the women are exercising personal choice. But I'm all for legislating against this; the celebration on ATOT would be legendary :laugh:

It isn't neccesary that I know better than people about this situation. All I am pointing out is that there seems to be a good reason as to why polygamy is outlawed in this country. And it isn't a religious reason that I presented. And it has been tested by overall society. Why do you think that most "civilized" countries do not allow polygamy anymore? It throws society off balance. England, Japan, Taiwan..., all civilized non-religious societies which have outlawed this practice. Why? Because it doesn't work. There is empirical evidence by the structuring of the societies. It seems like most people don't think about this situation before saying "yes" it is a good thing. They think with their "wangs" and not their "brains".

No, because it's politically and economically most advantageous to copycat the US.

Good points. I do think that even though there is no evidence to say that the correlation between the two isn't neccesarily a direct correlation but rather both outspurts f some larger problems, I do believe that even if indirect both will be generated if polygamy was started. But that is total conjecture. Your points are well taken and logical, so I will concede that no direct evidence of direct correlation is there, but who would have been twisted or knowledgable enough from before to actually do direct case studies other than the ones in the polygamist communities in the US? No one.

Also, there is no burden of proof for those against polygamy because that is the way civilized society works now. The burden of proof is for the ones for it. Show me empirical direct evidence where polygamy helps society and doesn't burden it? Show me a society that has allowed polygamy today that is better for it? And don't point to the pygmies because that is a totally different social structure than a technological structure, and also different lifestyle, smaller society, and not completely stable in the case that they are not a totally peacful society in and of themselves.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

But the amounts of violations of those laws increase in those types of closed communities as the polygamist communities. And most of the kids who are victimized never get out of the situation.

Since my work involves tracking and dealing with these people (predators that is), I know a little about the situation.

But if polygamy was legal, their communities wouldn't be "closed". Do we know if it's the polygamy, or the living on the fringe of society, that creates any existing correlation with abuse ?

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: gigapet
wow this thread contains some of the most moronic arguments/perspectives i've ever read on here. specifically JS80 and anyone that suggested that polygamy would lead to wide spread pedophilia

Not sure if that wouldn't be the case. Although I am not saying that it would be, but in most countries that accept polygamy, pedophilia is accepted as well. Older people marry young girls in those countries. A little disturbing.

And the cases of polygamy in the U.S. show an alarming corrolation of polygamist to pedophilia at least in some of the case studies they have done on the news. I will look for them.

There are always going to be sexual predators laws obviously do not change that.

But the amounts of violations of those laws increase in those types of closed communities as the polygamist communities. And most of the kids who are victimized never get out of the situation.

Since my work involves tracking and dealing with these people (predators that is), I know a little about the situation.

But if polygamy was legal, their communities wouldn't be "closed". Do we know if it's the polygamy, or the living on the fringe of society, that creates any existing correlation with abuse ?

Read right above, I grant that there is no evidence to say so. But there is no evidence to say it is not either.

 

[CKent]

The argument really isn't dissimilar to the one against guns, the only difference being guns have the potential to have a far more direct adverse effect on people. But they remain legal because the constitution was very clear about this particular freedom. It will be one of the last to be stripped away from us, I think. I give it 50 years max.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen
Even without the moral implications. The way society is now, society would not function as well if men had to juggle more than one family. It would be a slow progression to more civil unrest. Although I have heard that genetically women with more absent mates tend to give birth to girls because they are easier to care for. So the gender ratio if done would then start to favor multiple wives. But I disagree with the principle (disregarding any moral implications) because with our society as it is set up now, most people could not function very well juggling more than one family. Society wouldn't collapse, as some may think, but it would cripple it at least.

You make it sound as if the moment its legalized it will become widespread. Aside from the fact this is numerically impossible it would require both sexes to endorse it enmass...something that is highly unlikely to happen.

Very logical point, but if you allow for pockets of the society to break down (and I guarantee that if legalized communities would pocket or pull together), it would cause a crippling effect on parts of society. It wouldn't make a major blow though, but why do it if it would cause societal issues.

Because we live in a republic that (allegedly) values freedom.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
Anyway... the REAL reason why polygamy is currently not legal (and not going to become legal anytime soon) is because there is a roughly equal proportion of males and females in the US. Polygamous marriages most frequently occur in environments in which there is biological need. If something causes a shortage in one sex or other (typically war, which is why polygyny is the most common form of polygamy throughout history), then the other sex will agree to share in order to improve each individual's chances of reproduction.

That may be the reason it's not common in the United States, but is it really the reason why it's illegal? I would think it was outlawed for moral reasons, same as other alternative relationships.

Ah, I was waiting for this excellent question to come up.

Because an individual with multiple spouses does harm others, albeit indirectly (and insufficiently to be a law IMO). He reduces their chances of finding a mate to reproduce with. Less to go around and all that. A man with 12 wives means 11 other men go without.

On the moralist side, polygamy and homosexual marriages are completely unrelated. As far as I've always been concerned, 2 gay men mean 2 more women for the rest of us.

I don't think think that "not enough to go around" argument holds water myself. Realisticly, very few women are going to be willing to share...and very few men are going to be capable of providing for them. And even the male supporters of legalization in this case (myself included) think it would be a horrible route for they themselves to choose. I certainly have no desire to juggle multiple wives. The practice would continue to be so rare that it would have a neglible effect on others. Plus marriage hardly is a solid contract anymore in and of itself, so its not like a few people having multiple shoddy contracts that few people adhere to would really upset the situation.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: DaShen
It isn't neccesary that I know better than people about this situation. All I am pointing out is that there seems to be a good reason as to why polygamy is outlawed in this country. And it isn't a religious reason that I presented. And it has been tested by overall society. Why do you think that most "civilized" countries do not allow polygamy anymore? It throws society off balance. England, Japan, Taiwan..., all civilized non-religious societies which have outlawed this practice. Why? Because it doesn't work. There is empirical evidence by the structuring of the societies. It seems like most people don't think about this situation before saying "yes" it is a good thing. They think with their "wangs" and not their "brains".

I would argue thinking with our wangs is precisely the reason people are against it. Men don't like the idea that one alpha male may hogging up all the women and leaving none for them. I think thats irrational fear for the reasons I previously posted, but most fears are just that; irrational. Very few men represent the "alpha male" that would be able to command more then one wife on the "market" and thus the popular opinion is going to be against this idea.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
so the consensus seems to be that if the movement to change the legal definition of marriage from a man and a woman to 2 men or 2 woman succeeds, it will completely open up the legal avenues to getting polygamy legalized as well

Where do you get that from? I consider them to seperate issues, but my "if it doesn't effect me directly it should be legal" outlook on most laws causes me to view both as acceptable.

Frankly I think the government should abandone the term marriage altogether and simply give out some form of "civil union" to every combination. Leave the term marriage as a religious one, which you could easily argue it is.

 

[abeal2]

spock says yes

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen
Even without the moral implications. The way society is now, society would not function as well if men had to juggle more than one family. It would be a slow progression to more civil unrest. Although I have heard that genetically women with more absent mates tend to give birth to girls because they are easier to care for. So the gender ratio if done would then start to favor multiple wives. But I disagree with the principle (disregarding any moral implications) because with our society as it is set up now, most people could not function very well juggling more than one family. Society wouldn't collapse, as some may think, but it would cripple it at least.

You make it sound as if the moment its legalized it will become widespread. Aside from the fact this is numerically impossible it would require both sexes to endorse it enmass...something that is highly unlikely to happen.

Very logical point, but if you allow for pockets of the society to break down (and I guarantee that if legalized communities would pocket or pull together), it would cause a crippling effect on parts of society. It wouldn't make a major blow though, but why do it if it would cause societal issues.

Because we live in a republic that (allegedly) values freedom.

You're kidding, right? The US may give lip service to the concept of freedom, but does not truly value it.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: DaShen
Even without the moral implications. The way society is now, society would not function as well if men had to juggle more than one family. It would be a slow progression to more civil unrest. Although I have heard that genetically women with more absent mates tend to give birth to girls because they are easier to care for. So the gender ratio if done would then start to favor multiple wives. But I disagree with the principle (disregarding any moral implications) because with our society as it is set up now, most people could not function very well juggling more than one family. Society wouldn't collapse, as some may think, but it would cripple it at least.

You make it sound as if the moment its legalized it will become widespread. Aside from the fact this is numerically impossible it would require both sexes to endorse it enmass...something that is highly unlikely to happen.

Very logical point, but if you allow for pockets of the society to break down (and I guarantee that if legalized communities would pocket or pull together), it would cause a crippling effect on parts of society. It wouldn't make a major blow though, but why do it if it would cause societal issues.

Because we live in a republic that (allegedly) values freedom.

You're kidding, right? The US may give lip service to the concept of freedom, but does not truly value it.

That's why I said allegedly. I believe in the ideal, although I know in reality it isn't so.

 

[OutHouse]

if polygamy was legal would people openly show it? I do belive that if it was legal and my company found out i wouldnt be here for very long.

 

[abeal2]

Originally posted by: Citrix
if polygamy was legal would people openly show it? I do belive that if it was legal and my company found out i wouldnt be here for very long.

what company do u work for?