'Sister Wives': Polygamy law challenge called demand for equality

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I totally agree with you. Though i do not condone polygamy, it is not my place to tell someone how many people with whom they can intimately cohabitate. However, that being said, if they are going t recognize polygamy,
they need to recognize that women can have multiple husbands and that all the spouses, who MUST be consenting adults, are entitled to an EQUAL share of income and benefits.


Actually Polymory is on the rise. That is group marriage with any combination of people involved.

Polyamory—relationships with multiple, mutually consenting partners—has a coming-out party.

www.newsweek.com...




posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


This also means he's banging your wife. Not sure if you considered that. If you're still cool with that more power to you.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



But still - - - you can't create a second class citizen. It has to be equal. ALL must be called Marriage.

And eventually ALL will be.


Again, I disagree.

I don't think "marriage" has any decent legal standing. It is the "tradition of marriage." I think eventually they will all be called "legal unions," and there will be equality among them, and there will still be plenty of people that get "married" in churches or Elvis chapels.


I think the Divorce rate is abysmal myself. I hate it. But, you are criticizing the traditions of marriage, when divorce was almost unheard of until recent times. The modern view of marriage has destroyed the commitment, not the other way around. I'm not defending the practice of treating women as chattel, but I am pointing out a discrepancy in your opinion. Either it was better then, or better now, but you can't have it both ways? Let's not forget that men were also victims of those arranged marriages, the family elders made those decisions, it wasn't just young men out kidnapping their brides. Also, women have always been coveted in some way or another, and they still are. Take a look at any modern marketing scheme. I don't want to be perceived as all caveman like, but there are some obvious differences between men and women, and both benefit from playing their respective roles in nature. Equality in rights is important and significant, but sometimes it is taken to the extreme and people feel it necessary to ignore obvious physical differences. Men should not be bearing babies, regardless of advances in modern science!!



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I think if all the people being married are consensual to it, I say why not? It doesn't hurt anybody. Unless there is proof that it is psychologically harmful to the children? But I'm pretty sure there are cultures where being raised by more than two people is the norm. Maybe in our society they will be discriminated against, but will they not be just as loved by 3+ parents as one or two?

The only downside is that it is hard enough to keep a stable relationship with one other person, I could imagine it would be exponentially harder with two or more. The relationship would have to be absolutely equal for each member so that one person doesn't feel left out or less loved, and that might be kind of hard to balance for a long period of time. To be honest, I have never heard of a threeway relationship ever lasting long term. If anyone has experienced it or know someone who has, let me know. I'm interested to hear how it might work.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Ryanp5555
 


If she's ok with it, I'm ok with it.

I let my jealousy go back in my teen years. It didn't serve much purpose except for a lot of stress and fights, some torn up cars, and one missing tooth. I figured out there is a lot more fun to be had by sharing, and I also figured out that I am a pretty dam good catch, so there is no reason to fear that some girl might find someone better. If she does, then more power to her, but she won't.
With those realizations, there just isn't much need for jealousy anymore. Now, I am still more than willing to fight for my girl if she asks me to, and my nice streak is greatly surpassed by my mean streak, so when those days arrive, heads roll! Some women are turned on by a jealous man, and I can play the role if it gets me a little extra something, but in reality, I couldn't care less.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
It is the "tradition of marriage."


Don't care. Many "traditions" wear themselves out and become obsolete.

ALL unions must have the same name - - whether it be marriage or civil union.

Can not have one group saying: "I'm better then you because I get to use the word Marriage".



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


This also means he's banging your wife. Not sure if you considered that. If you're still cool with that more power to you.


Yeah - - cuz just like gay marriage - - is all about sex.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
...there are many traditions of marriage that are very old and have nothing to do with religion - but - those are usually considered illegal or not recognized in lieu of the bs claim that religion somehow owns or created the tradition of marriage...

...i agree with getreadyalready in that eventually all legal marriages will be called legal unions because thats what they really are if you have to file (pay for) a marriage license before the government recognizes your union...



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
If it's good enough for royalty to have mistresses, harems and whatever else, then it's good enough for the common person as well.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I truly don't think it is, I think its a very well laid conspiracy. Its also obcene and a complete mistreament of basically women as this is the way its practiced. Family is the practicum for relating to others and all of earth tests are basically about this. Family is the way to progression, as above so below. It is also what Infinite Progression is about.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
When I was in the Navy, I developed the philosphy, "If it doesn't affect my money or my free time, I'm not going to worry about it." That's pretty much how I feel about the whole who should marry who issue. Somebody wants three wives in America? Better them than me. Wait till those three wives turn into three ex-wives, three ex-wives' lawyers, and three alimony checks.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...there are many traditions of marriage that are very old and have nothing to do with religion - but - those are usually considered illegal or not recognized in lieu of the bs claim that religion somehow owns or created the tradition of marriage...

...i agree with getreadyalready in that eventually all legal marriages will be called legal unions because thats what they really are if you have to file (pay for) a marriage license before the government recognizes your union...




I think it will be a long long long time before everyone has a Legal Union.

Remember - - - Marriage is a global term.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:30 PM
link   
As a Christian I believe in the sanctity of tradtional male-female marriage.

However, beyond this point (which I have no interest arguing here, let it be known) I would like to state for the record that polygamy already exists.

Last time I checked, any time a man gets a signifcant amount of money or power, it seems his first order of business is to secure a girlfriend in addition to his wife. Or several girlfriends.

In fact, it seems to me that you will have an unbalanced situation no matter what where the rich, strong, or otherwise dominant males somehow end up multiple females (and who are theses girls? I always ask myself. Who lets themselves go like that?). Meanwhile the less superficially desireable males end up with no women and instead fill the internet with mysogynist rants.


Strikes me that this will go on no matter what labels humans give to things on the surface.

edit on 12-7-2011 by Partygirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


But it needs to be stopped. These women, whether its mormons or Sharia are abused and repressed. They are not freely choosing this destruction of their core. And to say its ok if someone consents, women are raped to put on the burka, they don't consent in private, often, but its all peachy fine to the public.

Any woman that I would find in this situation would be studied by me, the look her eyes. How cowed she was. And then it would be a group of women figuring out how to rescue them. I havn't seen this around me. Our women are quite outspoken, and its not acceptable.

Neither is betrayal in a relationship a cool thing.
edit on 12-7-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
My take on this is that gay marriage has indeed opened the door for polygamy and evern more, shall we say...exotic...domestic arrangements.

Nobody wanted to think about that. The entire issue (both pro and con) was framed in terms of the rights of Gay people. Nobody spent much time asking about the knock-on effects of changing the basic foundation of what defines marriage, one of the oldest and most universal human institutions.


Many objectors to gay marriage, like me, made exactly that argument the entire time. We knew it, and the criminal NWO people who back this agenda knew it too. They WANT to destroy the traditional family in every way. It lets them get more control over everyone's lives. Aaron Russo explained how this crowd supported women's lib with the intent of destroying the family unit and gaining control over women in the workplace. It worked very well.

But since the NWO crowd controls almost all media, they control almost all discourse and thought. They control people's opinions, and it's easy to sell tyranny under the cloak of things like "safety" and especially under the cloak of "liberation." Talk about newspeak. Gays, polygamists -- the people who are really backing you don't give a crap about you or your happiness. They just want to destroy free society. Hope you're proud of yourselves.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
How about the government stay out of what consenting adults personal lives? If two adults want to get hitched, so be it. If a man wants to marry 3 woman, all I have to say is good luck buddy, you're gonna need it. haha

All I mean is, that IMO, the government honestly has no business deciding who I can or can not marry, end of story. IMO, as long as you have a piece of paper with signatures of witnesses to say you are an adult, you want to be married & no one is forcing you to do it, then that should be enough.

(And this is coming from a woman who tends to lean more towards the conservative side)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99
Many objectors to gay marriage, like me, made exactly that argument the entire time. We knew it, and the criminal NWO people who back this agenda knew it too. They WANT to destroy the traditional family in every way. It lets them get more control over everyone's lives. Aaron Russo explained how this crowd supported women's lib with the intent of destroying the family unit and gaining control over women in the workplace. It worked very well.


With minds like yours - - I'd still be barefoot - pregnant - and in the kitchen.

Totally depended on some man.

NO THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I got my rights - - gays and polygamists deserve theirs.

You can stay in your Lockbox society.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl
As a Christian I believe in the sanctity of tradtional male-female marriage.

However, beyond this point (which I have no interest arguing here, let it be known) I would like to state for the record that polygamy already exists.
I'm not sure what you're getting at with the Christian comment. The Bible is full of polygamists. Even in the new testament polygamy is discussed:

www.biblicalpolygamy.com...


There absolutely is an example in the Bible, where God actually does command a situation of polygamy ---in the New Testament, even. ...

* believer WIFE is commanded of God to either:
remain unmarried, or
be reconciled back to her husband

* believer HUSBAND is commanded of God to:
not put away any wife, and to
let any departed wife return back to him

The key point is that the HUSBAND is NOT given the same commandments of instruction. Only the WIFE is commanded to remain unmarried, but the HUSBAND is not given that commandment. He is commanded of God to let her be married to him, either way!

Accordingly, the HUSBAND is of course, still free to marry another wife. That fact is further proved by the later verses
So the bible is somewhat sexist, it seems to allow polygyny but apparently not polyandry (and probably not gay marriage).

Personally I have no problem with polygamy or (polygyny or polyandry) as long as all the participants are consenting adults.

I'm a little surprised at the overwhelming majority of comments in this thread with the same view. It kind of makes me wonder why it's illegal if so many people don't have a problem with it.

It should at least be decriminalized as the OP article discusses. Legalizing polygamy would have tax implications and I think some good points have been made in this thread about that.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
hah, i told you this would happen.

whats next?

no seriously, where does it end?



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


There is a place to discuss theology on this board. That place is not here. I specifically stated in the post above I did not want to have this kind of argument here , and I will not, as it is neither productive nor germane to the main thrust of this topic and this forum. However I thought I should clarify my position and perspective so people have some framework for evaluating my opinions.





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join