Should Polygamy be legal?

reply to post by lastrebel

Polygamy should only be legal if women as well as men are allowed multiple wifes/husbands.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by lastrebel

 

Polygamy should only be legal if women as well as men are allowed multiple wifes/husbands.

edit on 14/4/11 by troubleshooter because: (no reason given)

I dont see a problem with that either......or even group marriges.....2 or more men and two or more women

Originally posted by lastrebel

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by lastrebel

 

Polygamy should only be legal if women as well as men are allowed multiple wifes/husbands.

edit on 14/4/11 by troubleshooter because: (no reason given)

I dont see a problem with that either......or even group marriges.....2 or more men and two or more women

It happens in a defacto sort of way now anyway.

reply to post by troubleshooter


Exactly......but now it is based on lies and hiding.....why not just be honest about it.

Yes, it certainly should be legal you'd just have to take measures to prevent a large group of people from abusing the tax benefits

Originally posted by lastrebel


With all the interest in Gay rights there is another segment of society that is quitely growing and starting to want their rights too.....polygimists.

If 5 men in a hundred have 3 wives, and 5 other men in a hundred have 2 wives,
that will leave 15 men in a hundred without any wives. They have very little motivation
to work hard or not get in trouble.

Of course if they are Muslim they can kill infidels and if they die they will get
72 virgins in heaven.

That is why Islam is popular with the elite(my theory) and why the church instituted monogamy to prevent the
chaos of a large population of single men.

Originally posted by RRokkyy

That is why Islam is popular with the elite(my theory) and why the church instituted monogamy to prevent the
chaos of a large population of single men.

I guess they didn't consider that China's one-child policy and female infanticide would throw a kink in the plan, then... What is the estimate now? Around 24 million men of age (I think that's by year 2020) won't find wives because there aren't enough women...

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Originally posted by RRokkyy


I guess they didn't consider that China's one-child policy and female infanticide would throw a kink in the plan, then... What is the estimate now? Around 24 million men of age (I think that's by year 2020) won't find wives because there aren't enough women...

edit on 14-4-2011 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)

Seems like the kleenex industry is going to skyrocket when they all hit puberty! they could just buy wives from Russia LMAO! Either that or they will be a whole lotta gay chinamen

reply to post by lastrebel


So this means a woman should be able to have multiple husbands too right???

i don't have time to read throuh the whole thread.

but obviously polygamy should be legal. i just want to start a dsicussion:

why do you think polygamy is NOT legal, and why polygamy is so so stigmatized? some of my theories:

-large families will eventually pose a threat to government. they are essentially small communities not being controlled directly by the government, often they are homeschooled (because there are so may parents)
-same principle as my first theory, divide and conquer theory
-also similar to the first, big families are hard to control or influence and will generally be against the sociopathic "norm" of society
-militias. large groups of like minded individuals have the makings of a militia. the only reason a government woudl fear a militia or an armed public is if they know their governing is corrupt

it makes me sick how the media spins them to be so negative and extreme. the only time we hear about polygamists are extremist mormon groups, or waco, and pretty much that is all 99% of the american population can relate to the idea of polygamy,

reply to post by shagreen heart


I was just about to say the same thing. I think the ideals of monogamy are a long time running conspiracy to keep the inherent power and influence of tribalism at bay. If I had ten wives, and thirty children, pretty soon my family is going to be pretty influential in local affairs, this was a threat to the church and the monarcchies.

They can do whatever, it really does not matter, and most females and males I have seen are better suited for that life style. But first some sobering thoughts, it will most likely create and propagate problems in the parring and monetary construct like the poster RRokkyy says above.

As some of the issues that they have in some middle easter countries were some of the more wealthier and richer men will get more of the females, and the rule of law and nature of both females and males will most likely lead it to be something like those civilizations, but still I forgot what the ratio of male to female actually is, but I think it's pretty even on there being about an equal amount of male and females born which will lead to a gap. But that gap should be covered in the construct of civilization mainly the war machine, and religions, and ethos and the monetary constructs, and all things that lead to the circumstances of the matting game, but yes it seems like it will lead to destabilization of males, and distribution of female types among those who can support and afford them, ie richer dudes.

But all in all it only works in certain scenarios and mental types of people. And in a way it is already like that only in cities we call polygamists, swingers, because of social and monetary precepts of living in cities does not usually afford the commodities of having multiple wifes and all that would require and entail, and even if they did there is always divorce and moving to new people as is common today. And in the more country settings it usually is a type of religious or cult like thing, with all the good and bad thrown in, and the good and bad depends on the person or persons in question, and what there persona's and what they are like, and off course the most important thing in all relationships..... circumstances. Really thats all it comes down to in any type of matting and construct of the matting game like polygamy and just marriage in general, it's all circumstances and the creation of those circumstances, or the enforcing of the said circumstances as it is in some places.

Anyways so should polygamy be legal? Sure why not, and whatever, if people want to then they should do that. But like everything else it ain't going to be all honky dory, it's just another circumstance.

Marriage should be a religous thing. If they want civil unions let the courts handle it. Otherwise stay outta people's lives, homes, and bank accts. Consenting adults should be left the eff alone.

Originally posted by agentblue

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Originally posted by RRokkyy

I guess they didn't consider that China's one-child policy and female infanticide would throw a kink in the plan, then... What is the estimate now? Around 24 million men of age (I think that's by year 2020) won't find wives because there aren't enough women...

edit on 14-4-2011 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)

Seems like the kleenex industry is going to skyrocket when they all hit puberty! they could just buy wives from Russia LMAO! Either that or they will be a whole lotta gay chinamen

Actually mail order brides is booming in the us according to some stuff I read online, I mean it is a growing thing everywhere though it is focused on the richest countries first like the US, and since china is growing on the world stage, it seems like a logical thing that will happen.
articles.sfgate.com... _1_matchmaking-mail-order-websites

i think polygamy is a good idea. i'm an older man with a young nuclear family and having another woman in the house, would make living so much easier. they could alternate with their pregnancies which gives them more time to recover from pregnancy. it means one woman would have the help of another and the load would be shared. it goes without saying that the trio would initially be harmoniously living together. the guy would have to earn sufficient for everyone. or have a decent farm.

It has been said humanity is "weakly polygynous." The word "polygyny" is distinct from but related to "polygamy:" The former means "multiple women for one man" while the latter means simply "multiple partners" and can be used for either gender.

Species classified by biologists as weakly polygynous include many different types of birds and mammals, with the most pronounced non-bird example being sea lions. The word "weakly" is used because they are not always polygynous...sometimes they pair off in "marriage-like" situations, depending on environmental conditions. For example, a certain species of bird (a type of tern) can be found in two distinct colonies: one in Maryland and one in Georgia. The former is quite obviously polygynous, while the latter tends to be monogamous, although they are the same species. The food they eat is more plentiful in Maryland, whereas it is scarcer in Georgia. It is suspected that by pairing off into male-female exclusive partnerships, the birds can more effectively gather food in Georgia. In Maryland, where the pickings are better, they can indulge in a more freewheeling love life, so to speak.

Polygynous species are defined by differences in male and female body sizes. The taller/bigger the males are than the females (as seen dramatically in sea lions), the more polygynous the species. This is because the males in these situations fight over the females. The generally slightly larger body size of the average human male compared with the average human female is evidence of this trait in humans.

When times were materially tougher (i.e., in most of recorded history), you see strong marriage values...just like the birds in Georgia. When things get more decadent (ancient Rome or Babylon, or modern-day society), these bonds start to disintegrate. In humans, this can be seen in what my friend informally calls the "70-30 law:" 30% of the males are "playas" who get 70% of the women, while 70% of the men have to divvy up the remaining 30% of the women, with many men getting nothing. This is a bit extreme (I don't think those figures are scientifically accurate), but we can definitely note the phenomenon to some extent.

It has also been proposed that at some point in our prehistory, we began marriage as a form of "sexual socialism" for greater social stability. Apparently, if too few men gather too many women into their harems, it creates unstable societies where the men are constantly fighting for the women. Stable marriage/partnerships create stable societies. When this system begins to break down, man reverts to his more natural polygynous instincts.

reply to post by kove400


then how do you explain other animals like the great apes and monkeys lack of multiple breasts? Using that logic one can justify homosexuality due to the fact that males have nipples too therefore they have the genetic predisposition to have female traits.

Interesting question OP.
I would support a man having multiple wives and a woman having multiple husbands IF you will support a Man having multiple husbands and a woman having multiple wife's and any combination thereof.

I am bisexual, can I have three husbands and three wife's? Or is this another one of those straight people only things. I always get excluded

Originally posted by kove400
I go by what Scripture says
we shouldnt have polygamy just cause it isnt right in the Creator's eyes. /editby]

Are you saying that Abraham, and the prophets weren't right ?
Should every one be single like jesus ?

In today's society,
would it not be better if people legally proclaimed
their polygamy rather than 'shacking-up' ?
At least it would show some responsibility.
The real injustice is saying that women don't have
enough brains to decide for themselves whether they
want a polygamous marriage. Lol

btw there are cultures where a woman has more than one husband.
East-asian budists, and some Mid-Eastern's do this.
The concept of a child growing-up with more adults to
supervise can be a benefit.
At any rate, for each their own, the government should not dictate
who you can marry.
Forbid that it gets as bad as in israel, where
you can lose your citizenship
if you don't marry cording to what the government dictates.

_________________

Originally posted by ToneDeaf

Originally posted by kove400
I go by what Scripture says
we shouldnt have polygamy just cause it isnt right in the Creator's eyes. /editby]

Are you saying that Abraham, and the prophets weren't right ?
Should every one be single like jesus ?

In today's society,
would it not be better if people legally proclaimed
their polygamy rather than 'shacking-up' ?
At least it would show some responsibility.
The real injustice is saying that women don't have
enough brains to decide for themselves whether they
want a polygamous marriage. Lol

btw there are cultures where a woman has more than one husband.
East-asian budists, and some Mid-Eastern's do this.
The concept of a child growing-up with more adults to
supervise can be a benefit.
At any rate, for each their own, the government should not dictate
who you can marry.
Forbid that it gets as bad as in israel, where
you can lose your citizenship
if you don't marry cording to what the government dictates.

_________________

yes but their government and its supporters need a brain transplant (lol)