Polyamory and Marriage

[SMOGZINN]

I wanted to continue the conversation about polyamory that was started in the "Gay Marriage and Society -- the Sequel" thread. I recognize that it was derailing that thread, so it deserves it's own thread.

I would like to start this out with with some information.

I am a polyamorous man in a polyamorous relationship. I am a active member in the local polyamory community. I personally know hundreds of polyamorous people.

Polygamy (one man with multiple women) is not very common in the poly community. People think polygamy is way more common then it is because that is what they see on the news and (fictional) TV shows like Big Love. The reality is that quads (four people of any gender) and polyandry (one woman with multiple men) are much more common, but even those tend to just be the way relationships formed from the larger concept of 'any number of any type' that modern polyamory espouses.

I personally think that Marriage Equality needs to include multiple partner groups, but I don't think America is ready just yet. There are a lot of things that need to happen before we can have a serious national debate on Poly Marriage, but it is coming.

First we need to win the same sex marriage fight. Because poly marriage will obviously include same sex members in the groups. We need to distinguish ourselves as a group distinct from but allied with the LGBT communities. We need to convince more of our members to come out and be public about their lifestyle in order to generate familiarity with the concept of modern polyamory, and serve as examples to repair our image in the media.

We are getting organized and are starting to work on all of these issues. The national debate on poly-marriage is coming. We know it is an uphill battle, and that there is a lot of practical issues that need to be addressed, but we have answers for most of them.

From where I sit the biggest problem is getting people to accept that polyamory is even a viable alternative to monogamy.

 

[woolfe9998]

I have no problem with polyamorous relationships, or even legally recognized marriages, so long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. The problem for polyamorists in general is that it has been associated with Mormon polygamy, which too often involves minors whose consent is questionable at best. The first order of business in arguing equality for polyamorists is to emphasize that "polygamy" as practiced by Mormon fundamentalists is the exception rather than the rule. So long as people continue to equate the one with the other, you're facing a very difficult task.

 

[almightyobo]

I personally don't see the issue with it. It is equal to same sex marriage to me, just with more parties involved.

If 3 or 4 people want to enter in the same contract as 2 then so be it... it doesn't affect me in the slightest. Are there other negative parts to it that I'm missing?

But then again I'm not religious, so my view may be tainted with logic and reason.

 

[fskimospy]

I think the biggest issue with polygamy is the rewriting of the legal code that it would require. Our marriage law as it currently stands serves to make a lot of default assumptions. ie: if you die without a will and no kids, your spouse gets your stuff. If you introduce additional wives, these default assumptions get really tricky really quickly.

None of that is insurmountable and I firmly believe that any group of people should be able to enter into a marriage so long as they are all consenting adults, but it is definitely something that will need to be addressed.

 

[smackababy]

I think the biggest issue with polygamy is the rewriting of the legal code that it would require. Our marriage law as it currently stands serves to make a lot of default assumptions. ie: if you die without a will and no kids, your spouse gets your stuff. If you introduce additional wives, these default assumptions get really tricky really quickly.

None of that is insurmountable and I firmly believe that any group of people should be able to enter into a marriage so long as they are all consenting adults, but it is definitely something that will need to be addressed.

I don't think it would be that hard of a change. Instead of going to a single spouse, assets / estate are divided equally among spouses.


I don't have a problem with polyamory, but I do agree there is a huge stigma surrounding it. A lot of the polygamy we hear about in the news stems from fringe, fanatical groups and not true practitioners. I think the same can be said about Muslims as well though.

 

[Blackjack200]

I don't think it would be that hard of a change. Instead of going to a single spouse, assets / estate are divided equally among spouses.


I don't have a problem with polyamory, but I do agree there is a huge stigma surrounding it. A lot of the polygamy we hear about in the news stems from fringe, fanatical groups and not true practitioners. I think the same can be said about Muslims as well though.

The OP would know more about it that me, but I believe many polyamorous people have a "primary" relationship and then others that they have, I hate to say 'secondary' or 'tertiary', but non-primary relationships in any case.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think the biggest issue with polygamy is the rewriting of the legal code that it would require. Our marriage law as it currently stands serves to make a lot of default assumptions. ie: if you die without a will and no kids, your spouse gets your stuff. If you introduce additional wives, these default assumptions get really tricky really quickly.

I hear this a lot but rarely hear any good arguments about it. The joint property issues are already handled by our laws. If a man dies with no wife but 3 (adult) children, how does the state deal with that? The exact same thing would happen in the case of a woman dying and leaving behind three husbands. When people get divorced the courts have to determine who gets what, in poly there would just be more people to split the property up between.

None of that is insurmountable and I firmly believe that any group of people should be able to enter into a marriage so long as they are all consenting adults, but it is definitely something that will need to be addressed.

I agree that it will have to be addressed, but I think the problems are a lot more minor then people realize.

 

[randomrogue]

I don't see the division of assets as a problem. You divide by x instead of 2. Not that big a deal. I find it interesting that a sticking point to marriage is how difficult divorce would be. If you are prepared to enter the union then you should be prepared for how difficult it is to leave one. Divorce is a nightmare regardless of how many are part of it.

One solution is to simply get rid of the financial part of marriage. Get rid of the license and the only common property is stuff you both sign for such as a joint bank account, mortgage, and car loan.

 

[SMOGZINN]

The OP would know more about it that me, but I believe many polyamorous people have a "primary" relationship and then others that they have, I hate to say 'secondary' or 'tertiary', but non-primary relationships in any case.

That is the 'dating' stage of polyamory. It is nearly impossible to build a polyamorous relationship all in one go. You tend to start small and add on, and during that process you have primary, secondary, ect. relationships. But once the relationship has entered the 'let's get married' stage you tend to count all those members as equal partners in the relationship.

 

[Vdubchaos]

OP - if you like it/enjoy it and practice it....and it's what makes you happy, I really don't see a point for our Government or Society to accept it.

Why are you looking for some kind of validation? Or do you think it should be more widespread? I think if people wanted it, it already would be.

 

[fskimospy]

I hear this a lot but rarely hear any good arguments about it. The joint property issues are already handled by our laws. If a man dies with no wife but 3 (adult) children, how does the state deal with that? The exact same thing would happen in the case of a woman dying and leaving behind three husbands. When people get divorced the courts have to determine who gets what, in poly there would just be more people to split the property up between.

I think there might be greater issues than that. So if spouse #1 supported you while you were in college to become a doctor, forgoing school of her own, does the second wife you married a week before dropping dead get an equal split? Does everyone in the previous marriage have to consent to adding new people to it? In a divorce do you get half the assets of all the other accumulated spouses? 1/3rd? What if they were married for unequal lengths of time?

The issues are thorny and significant.

 

[smackababy]

I think there might be greater issues than that. So if spouse #1 supported you while you were in college to become a doctor, forgoing school of her own, does the second wife you married a week before dropping dead get an equal split? Does everyone in the previous marriage have to consent to adding new people to it? In a divorce do you get half the assets of all the other accumulated spouses? 1/3rd? What if they were married for unequal lengths of time?

The issues are thorny and significant.

Those issues are in normal marriages as well. If you marry a girl, and die a week later, is she entitled for all your millions? What about premaritial assets in the event of a divorce?

I think most poly marriages will all enter under contract at once, or dissolve prior marriages to form a new poly marriage. But I suppose if one enters after another, that might be something that should be addressed, however, I don't see it as a large problem.

 

[SMOGZINN]

OP - if you like it/enjoy it and practice it....and it's what makes you happy, I really don't see a point for our Government or Society to accept it.

The exact same thing can be said for any number of minority groups. I wish it to be accepted by society and our government so that I can practice it in peace and not have the government discriminate against me.

Why are you looking for some kind of validation? Or do you think it should be more widespread?

I do think it should be more widespread, but only because I think that more people are poly then is willing to admit it do to the general condemnation of society and the legal problems that can create.

I think if people wanted it, it already would be.

At one point interracial marriage was illegal. Gay marriage is still illegal.
Things only happen when we make them happen. We are just now getting organized to make this happen.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think there might be greater issues than that. So if spouse #1 supported you while you were in college to become a doctor, forgoing school of her own, does the second wife you married a week before dropping dead get an equal split? Does everyone in the previous marriage have to consent to adding new people to it? In a divorce do you get half the assets of all the other accumulated spouses? 1/3rd? What if they were married for unequal lengths of time?

The issues are thorny and significant.

I agree partially here. The problem is that there are several different concepts of poly marriage.

If John and Sue marry each other, and Sue and Paul marry each other, are Paul and John married to each other?

If we say no they are not then we have two separate marriages that have one person in common. Personally, I think we have require that John and Paul are married to each other. Otherwise we do create too many problems.

We can also ask the question, can John be married to Sue with out Sue being married to John? Or, is marriage always equal and reciprocal?

I think a reasonable rule is that a person can have only one marriage but to any number of people, which would also cause all marriage to be reciprocal and equal.

But, I'll admit that this is a controversial issue even in the poly community.

 

[smackababy]

I agree partially here. The problem is that there are several different concepts of poly marriage.

If John and Sue marry each other, and Sue and Paul marry each other, are Paul and John married to each other?

If we say no they are not then we have two separate marriages that have one person in common. Personally, I think we have require that John and Paul are married to each other. Otherwise we do create too many problems.

We can also ask the question, can John be married to Sue with out Sue being married to John? Or, is marriage always equal and reciprocal?

I think a reasonable rule is that a person can have only one marriage but to any number of people, which would also cause all marriage to be reciprocal and equal.

But, I'll admit that this is a controversial issue even in the poly community.

I think the best idea would be to only allow a single marriage of however many number of people. It can be easily nulled and a new marriage formed in the event x and y are married and would like to add z to that marriage. Possibly an alteration process that every member of new union must consent and become equal partners in. Marriage is a contract and in order to alter that contract one must have consent of all parties involved, if I understand basic contract laws correctly.

 

[randomrogue]

Wait poly can have 1 married couple with 1 partner married to another person? I thought it was generally one union. Nested marriages seems like a legal nightmare. One union at a time, not a pyramid of them, seems like the way to go.

 

[smackababy]

Wait poly can have 1 married couple with 1 partner married to another person? I thought it was generally one union. Nested marriages seems like a legal nightmare. One union at a time, not a pyramid of them, seems like the way to go.

I think the only legal precedent we have is one guy married five times to five different women. Or something similar to that. I don't think modern polyamory has attempted to practice in marriage. At least, I haven't heard of any cases being brought up about it. A pyramid system seems cumbersome and a logistical nightmare, but a single contractual union between all parties involved seems rather straightforward.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I have no problem with it, as long as it's a group of consenting adults, and there's adequate protection for any children.

As SMOGZINN points out, we've seen polygamy cults where underage females were made to marry older men, but I consider that a problem even if the man has just one child bride instead of a harem. That's a "creepy cult" issue rather than a polyamory issue.

 

[Fern]

I hear this a lot but rarely hear any good arguments about it. The joint property issues are already handled by our laws. If a man dies with no wife but 3 (adult) children, how does the state deal with that? The exact same thing would happen in the case of a woman dying and leaving behind three husbands. When people get divorced the courts have to determine who gets what, in poly there would just be more people to split the property up between.
-snip-

I think you're being over simplistic about the legal issues.

The reason the courts (already) know what to do about two married people, or divorced people, is because we have a long history of case law and a long history of legislating these issues.

There is no such history for polygamy. It must all be started from scratch.

Just taking one issue - social security and pensions benefits for the divorced or survivor(s) - would be ridiculously complicated and require substantial changes given that a subsequent marriage typically terminates those benefits/rights.

Just saying 'leave it up to the courts' is simplistic. Every situation requiring a 'custom' court settlement/decision is the farthest thing from simple there is. And nobody can plan shizz because nobody would know what the 'custom' decision is going to be.

Fern

 

[OinkBoink]

I'm not American and I can't speak about it from an American's cultural and legal perspective, but as a human being, I support polyamory if it's amongst consenting adults. When the people involved have no problem with it, screw what a 3rd party thinks.

 

[colonelciller]

I think the biggest issue with polygamy is the rewriting of the legal code that it would require.

if that't the biggest issue then it's really a non-issue.
how long did it take to strip away liberty and privacy in the US after 9-11? not very long at all.

 

[Vdubchaos]

The exact same thing can be said for any number of minority groups. I wish it to be accepted by society and our government so that I can practice it in peace and not have the government discriminate against me.

Here is my solution to your problem

FUCK the government

I do think it should be more widespread, but only because I think that more people are poly then is willing to admit it do to the general condemnation of society and the legal problems that can create.

It's as popular as status quo. People will do what they do regardless of laws of society views.

At one point interracial marriage was illegal. Gay marriage is still illegal.
Things only happen when we make them happen. We are just now getting organized to make this happen.

Even if it was illegal,it doesn't matter. Law does NOT stop people from doing what they want to do (freedom).....it only punishes them for doing so.

History is my reason for saying "fuck the government".

 

[SMOGZINN]

Here is my solution to your problem

FUCK the government

Easy to say, but the government has a way of intruding and making your life difficult. It has recently made my life difficult, for no reason other then someone didn't like our lifestyle.

History is my reason for saying "fuck the government".

Say that often enough and eventually the government will fuck you.

 

[randomrogue]

I'm a bit unclear how the limiting of ones rights can be solved by saying "fuck the government".

Vdub has been spinning his old NWA records...

 

[nehalem256]

I'm a bit unclear how the limiting of ones rights can be solved by saying "fuck the government".

Vdub has been spinning his old NWA records...

How is the government not recognizing polyamory limiting ones rights?