Polygamy

[sprockets]

To get the argument started and in response to this:



I'm unmarried (never have been and don't actually believe in marriage) but I love my family, dogs and a few other things, so it can't be that you can only love one thing. Why, apart from religion, tradition and custom, isn't it allowed In our society? What harm does it cause? If we're going to allow gays to be married, why not then also allow polygamy?

 

[Silent Alarm]

It is possible to like a few people at once but marrying them sounds like a pain in the nuts. I mean one is ****in enough when emotions and care is involved.

 

[ieasys00]

 

[ioppolo]

Disgonbegud.gif

 

[ShanDog]

Would be too hard for Centrelink to rewrite all the policies and forms.

 

[Coolangatta]

There's more than enough campaigners on bigfooty to start a movement.

 

[Power Raid]

To get the argument started and in response to this:

View attachment 417524

I'm unmarried (never have been and don't actually believe in marriage) but I love my family, dogs and a few other things, so it can't be that you can only love one thing. Why, apart from religion, tradition and custom, isn't it allowed In our society? What harm does it cause? If we're going to allow gays to be married, why not then also allow polygamy?

I can't see a reason why not but that's a separate debate to gay marriage.

 

[Catfish Alley]

What does not believining marriage mean? Plenty of examples of it around.

Can't see much demand for it. Sounds like a pain. Every polygamist I've seen seems to be an absolute weirdo.

 

[HairyO]

What does not believining marriage mean? Plenty of examples of it around.

Can't see much demand for it. Sounds like a pain. Every polygamist I've seen seems to be an absolute weirdo.

I watch a lot of video content involving a guy and 2 girls.

They seem happy enough.

 

[Shell]

I would tend to believe more in open marriages/ie. not having a boring sex life your whole life.

Not this tho.

 

[iluvparis]

Is it a gene pool thing?

Better to have more diverse offspring than have 90% of Sydney produced by Lance Franklin

 

[JackOutback]

Is it a gene pool thing?

Better to have more diverse offspring than have 90% of Sydney produced by Lance Franklin

I certainly believe there is a social consideration. We don't want the rich or strong scooping up all the talent. It's also unlikely to change because of the financial/legal implications. Personally I have no issue with it whatsoever. The idea that you can only love one person at a time is a social construct and the primary reason people don't love more than one person at a time is because they voluntarily shut down the option.

 

[sprockets]

I can't see a reason why not but that's a separate debate to gay marriage.

Hence the separate topic...

 

[MWPP]

I'm far more supportive of polyamory and open relationships than polygamy, but I'm a rather vanilla monogamist personally haha

 

[ioppolo]

I certainly believe there is a social consideration. We don't want the rich or strong scooping up all the talent. It's also unlikely to change because of the financial/legal implications. Personally I have no issue with it whatsoever. The idea that you can only love one person at a time is a social construct and the primary reason people don't love more than one person at a time is because they voluntarily shut down the option.

You have a wife and kids yeah? Have you practiced Polygamy whilst with your wife?

 

[Scotland]

There's no moral reason to oppose it, but on a practical level it's difficult to administer.

If a bloke has two wives and wants to divorce one of them, then what? Does she still get the house? Does she split it with the non-divorced wife?

Straight to the too hard basket.

 

[HairyO]

Is it a gene pool thing?

Better to have more diverse offspring than have 90% of Sydney produced by Lance Franklin

The Swans want you to keep your thoughts to yourself, and Buddy is free to share the love.

There's no moral reason to oppose it, but on a practical level it's difficult to administer.

If a bloke has two wives and wants to divorce one of them, then what? Does she still get the house? Does she split it with the non-divorced wife?

Straight to the too hard basket.

Not sure "lawyers' paradise" is reason enough to be against something. They always find a way to make money.

It would simply require a new formula which ultimately screws over the guy.

 

[Scotland]

Not sure "lawyers' paradise" is reason enough to be against something. They always find a way to make money.

It would simply require a new formula which ultimately screws over the guy.

Marriage is about two people. You can't change that definition, it's traditional.

#leftylogic

 

[HairyO]

Marriage is about two people. You can't change that definition, it's traditional.

#leftylogic

Someone posted about the animal kingdom and how many species see homosexual behaviours. If this is a sign that it is natural, I assume we should run the numbers on male animals having a posse of females. Mormons are very keen on this branch of the sciences.

 

[Scotland]

Someone posted about the animal kingdom and how many species see homosexual behaviours. If this is a sign that it is natural, I assume we should run the numbers on male animals having a posse of females. Mormons are very keen on this branch of the sciences.

Personally I like the lion approach. Less keen on the Black Widow.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Doesn't worry me as long as my husband isn't into it
Apart from that, what happens between consenting adults is none of my business.

 

[Duvel]

To get the argument started and in response to this:

View attachment 417524

I'm unmarried (never have been and don't actually believe in marriage) but I love my family, dogs and a few other things, so it can't be that you can only love one thing. Why, apart from religion, tradition and custom, isn't it allowed In our society? What harm does it cause? If we're going to allow gays to be married, why not then also allow polygamy?

There is no moral, traditional, religious reasons why polygamy can't be illegal. After all there are many traditional practices endorsing polygamy. Moral and religious reasons depends on what religion you are talking about, but Christianity once endorsed the practice, and certain denomination still do.

There are some "economic" arguments against polygamy, in societies that develop their traditions around scarcity, such as the indigenous Australians, polygamy cause harm to tribes where there are small population, small genetic pool (bottleneck), competition for partner so on.


Now what about Australia and the relevance to the SSM debate? There is no relevance to SSM debate, it is scare-mongering, however I am willing to humour the point and discuss it:

From a civil point of view; marriage is a contract between two people, a commitment. The SSM is about civil marriage (not religious, as much as religious people argue, the fact remains the Marriage Act is a secular legislation belonging to the Australian Government, a civil matter, not religious.) Further addition to this fact; no religions owns a monopoly on the definition of marriage.

So where do polygamy play a role in civil matter? If society is willing to accept polygamy, then I guess it isn't an issue. However from a civil legislation point of view, it would be a headache legal nightmare. As I said before; marriage is a contract between two people. Polygamy complicates that contract, by invoking it three-ways, or multiple-ways.

How do you solve legally on who gets the right to custody, the inheritance, divorce proceedings, so on. In accordance with rights given to Australian people; If a Man wish to marry two women, do we require consent from both women? Would this mean the women are married to each other as well? Likewise for vice versa with two males and female. What happens with a divorce? There are also matter of custody, family taxes, and benefits. We have all sort of legislations referring to a couple, so how does that work? If two wives or two husband survives their spouse, which of the surviving spouse conflicting wishes will be respected if the dead spouse did not leave behind a will?

It is worth noting that an open relationship isn't illegal. If a married couple decided to have a mutual partner, that is akin to polygamy, which isn't illegal either. It is just the relationship is not recognised by the government. That is the key point: Marriage is recognised by the government for legal matters and rights. That is the crux of the whole thing.

 

[Beerfish]

**** that. I can barely handle one wife.

 

[sprockets]

There is no moral, traditional, religious reasons why polygamy can't be illegal. After all there are many traditional practices endorsing polygamy. Moral and religious reasons depends on what religion you are talking about, but Christianity once endorsed the practice, and certain denomination still do.

There are some "economic" arguments against polygamy, in societies that develop their traditions around scarcity, such as the indigenous Australians, polygamy cause harm to tribes where there are small population, small genetic pool (bottleneck), competition for partner so on.


Now what about Australia and the relevance to the SSM debate? There is no relevance to SSM debate, it is scare-mongering, however I am willing to humour the point and discuss it:

From a civil point of view; marriage is a contract between two people, a commitment. The SSM is about civil marriage (not religious, as much as religious people argue, the fact remains the Marriage Act is a secular legislation belonging to the Australian Government, a civil matter, not religious.) Further addition to this fact; no religions owns a monopoly on the definition of marriage.

So where do polygamy play a role in civil matter? If society is willing to accept polygamy, then I guess it isn't an issue. However from a civil legislation point of view, it would be a headache legal nightmare. As I said before; marriage is a contract between two people. Polygamy complicates that contract, by invoking it three-ways, or multiple-ways.

How do you solve legally on who gets the right to custody, the inheritance, divorce proceedings, so on. In accordance with rights given to Australian people; If a Man wish to marry two women, do we require consent from both women? Would this mean the women are married to each other as well? Likewise for vice versa with two males and female. What happens with a divorce? There are also matter of custody, family taxes, and benefits. We have all sort of legislations referring to a couple, so how does that work? If two wives or two husband survives their spouse, which of the surviving spouse conflicting wishes will be respected if the dead spouse did not leave behind a will?

It is worth noting that an open relationship isn't illegal. If a married couple decided to have a mutual partner, that is akin to polygamy, which isn't illegal either. It is just the relationship is not recognised by the government. That is the key point: Marriage is recognised by the government for legal matters and rights. That is the crux of the whole thing.

So the objection to polygamy is what? It's complicated?

 

[Catfish Alley]

Is there a big demand for this or something? Usually it's just little religious groups out in the wilderness.