Are Multi-Partner Marriages Gonna Be a Thing?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
... do not ask that it be legitimized and normalized by edict of law when it is plainly abnormal.

There are a MILLION things that are legal and legitimized by the government, that are "abnormal" (meaning in the minority).

originally posted by: ketsuko
Once society decided that "marriage" is primarily about what makes you feel good as an adult (the modern definition of love) and really nothing else, then no arrangement of people is outside the bounds.

This is what we have done to accommodate gay marriage.

Whether you know it or not, or like it or not, marriage has, for many years been about what people want for their own personal lives. Look at Britney Spears. No one EVER complained about how common divorce is or tried to make it illegal to marry in Vegas.

Marriage is it once was, an arrangement for the begetting and rearing of children, no longer exists.

That is absolutely NOT true! Actually, the vast majority of people marry with the idea of having children.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Marriage is your right is it?

Go ask the hottest supermodel to marry, and when she says no, try suing her for denying you a basic personal right. See how far you get.

That's hyperbole! I have a right to own a firearm, but that doesn't mean I can go in the store and just take one. I have a right to free speech, but that doesn't mean everyone has to listen. Marriage is between CONSENTING adults.

a reply to: Night Star

These are all issues that can happen within ANY marriage. Not enough attention for the kids from Dad, illness, competing children... You work it out. That's not a good reason to keep it illegal.

Gawd! Why would anyone want more than one spouse?

the Chinese outlawed Polyandry in Tibet when they took it over.
en.wikipedia.org...

And

"According to Julius Caesar, it was customary among the ancient Britons for brothers, and sometimes for fathers and sons, to have their wives in common."

ew

originally posted by: Night Star
a reply to: Stormdancer777

But why marry them? Why not just live together? Usually people marry for love and commitment and choosing one partner above all others. The partner is special and they share their love and life together, not with a group of people.

Legal Marriage is rather "new". First official recordings of marriage were the richer people in the Roman empire, due to property and wealth. The "commoners" had just civil agreement, and no official recordings.

The traditional oath, is "To love and to cherish, in sickness and in health, until death do us part". So why cannot this pledge be made to more than one?

You do not simply love only 1 child, if you have two.. You love them both, correct?

So why would it not be possible, should you find a couple people who all get along, like each other, and are open-minded enough to all want to make a life together?

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: Night Star
a reply to: Stormdancer777

But why marry them? Why not just live together? Usually people marry for love and commitment and choosing one partner above all others. The partner is special and they share their love and life together, not with a group of people.

it was cultural, I think one would have to be brought up within this culture to fully accept it.

Even today first cousins marry into arranged marriages because of inheritance and property

Hmmm, interesting.

With so many professing libertarians around here, I find it shocking, sometimes how many folks absolutely do not believe in the basic maxim: "live and let live."

Who cares who's married to whom? We have much more important stuff to worry about.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Gawd! Why would anyone want more than one spouse?

Gives me a headache just thinking about it! LOL

a reply to: Cygnis

I think it is absolutely possible to love more than one man.

cough

originally posted by: Gryphon66

With so many professing libertarians around here, I find it shocking, sometimes how many folks absolutely do not believe in the basic maxim: "live and let live."

I find it odd as well. You either adhere to the 'stay out of my business' paradigm or you are kind of not really a Libertarian.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Gryphon66

With so many professing libertarians around here, I find it shocking, sometimes how many folks absolutely do not believe in the basic maxim: "live and let live."

I find it odd as well. You either adhere to the 'stay out of my business' paradigm or you are kind of not really a Libertarian.

*nods*

I guess it's kind of like the Golden Rule ... a simple yet profound moral code in 11 words. Problem is, everyone has to live by it. (In either case).

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Or woman..

LOL..

Perhaps the sticking point here, so to speak, in the multi-marriage concept is sex.

I just checked the package, and there's nothing there that says everyone has to have sex with each other in a marriage.

I mean, sure, again, the more the merrier but ...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Perhaps the sticking point here, so to speak, in the multi-marriage concept is sex.

I just checked the package, and there's nothing there that says everyone has to have sex with each other in a marriage.

I mean, sure, again, the more the merrier but ...

It doesn't have to be.

There are financial reasons, responsibility reasons, and what not.

Sex, could be a reason, but people do that regardless of their relationship status. In fact, many are not getting into relationships so they can do exactly that.

More so, the relationship model, be it a "binary" couple, or a "multiple" type relationship is for stability purposes. Trust, and commitment, and the continuity of the family-units success and happiness.

a reply to: ATODASO

Technically all marriages are multi-partner marriages, considering it takes two to tango.

originally posted by: Cygnis

originally posted by: Night Star
a reply to: Stormdancer777

But why marry them? Why not just live together? Usually people marry for love and commitment and choosing one partner above all others. The partner is special and they share their love and life together, not with a group of people.

Legal Marriage is rather "new". First official recordings of marriage were the richer people in the Roman empire, due to property and wealth. The "commoners" had just civil agreement, and no official recordings.

The traditional oath, is "To love and to cherish, in sickness and in health, until death do us part". So why cannot this pledge be made to more than one?

You do not simply love only 1 child, if you have two.. You love them both, correct?



So why would it not be possible, should you find a couple people who all get along, like each other, and are open-minded enough to all want to make a life together?

I know plenty of couples who get along wonderfully with other couples, other people, but they don't share their spouses or want a life together. If you truly love and cherish someone, to me at least, you don't replace and add others into the relationship as though they aren't enough for you. Doesn't seem honest and from the heart for some reason. I'm the romantic type and don't share.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ATODASO

Technically all marriages are multi-partner marriages, considering it takes two to tango.

so it takes three to line dance? lol

a reply to: ATODASO

"so it takes three to line dance? lol"

I would have said line up.

originally posted by: crazyewok
I say why not?


Long as its between contenting adults I see it no buisness of the goverment how many spouses you have.

If I want five wifes then bloody let me.

"Marriage" is a religious term, Social Partnerships belong to Caesar's. Government has no business in our bedrooms.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Gawd! Why would anyone want more than one spouse?

Just for the sake of discussion, I think I would like it for many reasons-

Variety? An element which adds to our current relationship, in many ways... in ideas, in thought, in style.
Like in our joint projects, he could bring an extra something to our conceptions (we're often doing renovation work on our property).

He could maybe help with things neither of us like to deal with - like landscaping!

It would be another voice in our discussions at the dinner table, bring new insights.

And well, yeah, sex too.... it might be interesting to experience a different man, with a different way of making love.
But I've found I am not interested in sex for sex sake, like a sport - I can only enjoy it if I have a loving, trusting and respectful relation with the person.

I imagine it would change nothing about my feelings for the love of my life right now. Love isn't something you have a limited amount to "give out", I don't think.

But that is all theory, which is not always compatible with reality. He's not okay with it even in theory, so, it shall stay there. But it's funny to consider.

a reply to: Cygnis

I have always maintained that if you're still wanting to have regular sex, the very last thing to do is to get married. LOL.

(That's only partially true of course.)

I think we need to expand what we mean by relationship. I know several "thouples" that are and have been thriving.

It's really ... fun ... to see a triangular relationship in action rather than just he/she said - she/he said.

It breaks out a whole new sort of "honesty."