why is polygamy illegal?

[MJinZ]

If I need to spell it out for you Taejin I can do that to. I know it just goes over your head the idea that if gay marriage is legalized its not a huge leap to legalize polygamy. But I can spell it out if you want since your just so smart! And I am against gay marriage [guess that makes me a bad person!], I just think if gay marriage is legalized then F it, why not legalize other things with regards to marriage.

Sounds about right. "F it" is the extent of your cerebral capacity.

 

[Craig234]

I just wrote one of my two or so favorite posts of the year explaining in greaqt deal to our anti-gay bigot above the nature of the bigotry he has, in perhaps 15 paragraphs, and lost the post on the last key.

I'm very ready to walk away in frustration, but I guess I should write a smaller, less satisfying version. Oh, that's frustrating. Unfortunately, that better version is lost.

I explained to him that he's the one not rational. That in my opinion, his reaction of repulsion most heterosexuals have to the idea of same-sex acts is driving his opinions on homosexuality.

I explained how our society has learned a lot about homosexuality recently - how it's a natural condition among other natural conditions a small percent of people have,

I explained his errors in trying to cover up for the complete lack of any rational basis for his whoring out the word "morality" as a cover for his bigoted views has no substance - and how he compensates for the lack of substance with the equating of same-sex relationships with "man goat" relationships, which falsely dehumanizes gay people as goats, saying he's superior to them, in a logical error "false analogy".

I explained how the prevous poster wrongly assumed he's a fundi because such several logical flaws tend to be present among people who have thrown rationality out and tend to form isolated communities to reinforce each others' views - fundies. I explained how anti-gay views are especially resilient against the educational process in such isolated communities. But there are some simple weak people, like him, who do so outside such communities.

I mentioned that such anti-gay views have been strong for millenia, because they tend to be societally-reinforced prejudices since gays, who are always present in small pecentages, are small percents.

And finally I said that the information age has had the truth of homosexuality get more and more exposure as gays have 'revealed themselves', leaving people with the choice between dealing with the truth and adjusting their views, out of the common decency - but not universal decency, as the posted showed - not to discriminate against people unjustly, or to hang on to their bigotry without any basis.

I'd explained how he had let the emotinal reaction of repulsion to gay sex lead him to invent the lies to justify the discrimination - and I'd even explained how his reaction was called by many "homophobia", the fear of homosexuality, with a mention how ironically, many who 'prove' their insecurity of how they aren't gay by discriminating against gays are themselves gay and not wanting to say so because of society's stigma. But that basically, it's about justifying the bigotry.

But the post I was very pleased with that put a lot of this in ways I'd planned to save a copy with as it had been written in way I was happy with, was lost.

 

[Taejin]

Although I think some of your posts are crazy Craig234, I must admit you take pains in writing readable posts that (usually) attempt to fully address the other side, unless you're engaging in a pseudo-shitstorm with one of the foaming-in-the-mouth rightwingers.

I can see peonyu has decided not to sit down and think reeeaaall hurd about why polygamy leads to societal problems, but the gist of it is the human population is approximately 50% male and 50% female.

Anyways, the societal norms of sexuality are pretty much that, societal. I think history has repeatedly shown that while human sexuality has its roots in genetics, the lines between heterosexuality and homosexuality is pretty blurry. And, for what its worth, nature has also shown homosexual behavior in other species as well.

In the end, all we're doing is looking for love

 

[Vic]

Anti-Mormon bigotry in the late 1800's. In the US, there is no other reason.

 

[OutHouse]

Except im A- not religious and B- definately not a fundie and C- Dont wish to marry a Goat or another man.

you have to try the goat man, nothing even comes close.

 

[Tsavo]

Polygamy is illegal because no one in their fucking right mind would be able to put up with that many women.

 

[Craig234]

Although I think some of your posts are crazy Craig234

That's ok, it's just the sound of correct policies to those who are not yet ready for them.

, I must admit you take pains in writing readable posts that (usually) attempt to fully address the other side, unless you're engaging in a pseudo-shitstorm with one of the foaming-in-the-mouth rightwingers.

Thanks. While my favorite posts are from our best people, the ones who agree with me, I definitely appreciate a post like that from someone who doesn't. ANd that's a fair description.

I can see peonyu has decided not to sit down and think reeeaaall hurd about why polygamy leads to societal problems, but the gist of it is the human population is approximately 50% male and 50% female.

That problem might be overrated. I'm guessing the percent of people who want and can afdford poygamy isn't that high and can be absorbed by our single people.

Another problem I do see is that polygamy tends to be the activity of the rich who can afford it, and almost by definition from that usual disparity in wealth, and the disproporationate benefits (the primary gets the services of many, while each of the many spouses gets a fraction of the primary partner), it tends to be an unhealthily power-imbalanced relationship, exploitave almost inherently.

Anyways, the societal norms of sexuality are pretty much that, societal. I think history has repeatedly shown that while human sexuality has its roots in genetics, the lines between heterosexuality and homosexuality is pretty blurry. And, for what its worth, nature has also shown homosexual behavior in other species as well.

In the end, all we're doing is looking for love

And, for we on the left, truth and justice

 

[Infohawk]

The more interesting question is why SHOULD polygamy be illegal? The religious and tradition arguments are out the window with the trend towards gay marriage. So then how do we object to it? Ultimately it does come down to saying, you need to spread the wealth and you can't hog all the resources (woman).

But I suspect even if you legalized it most truly free woman would not be interested. Why lose your bargaining power? And if you're thinking a two man and two woman (assume no gay sex, just some sort of legal swapping) I still think you'd find people getting agitated by the power dynamics.

This is why we really only see polygamy in regions where women have no power. Middle-East, some crazy Mormon communities.

 

[MJinZ]

The more interesting question is why SHOULD polygamy be illegal? The religious and tradition arguments are out the window with the trend towards gay marriage. So then how do we object to it? Ultimately it does come down to saying, you need to spread the wealth and you can't hog all the resources (woman).

But I suspect even if you legalized it most truly free woman would not be interested. Why lose your bargaining power? And if you're thinking a two man and two woman (assume no gay sex, just some sort of legal swapping) I still think you'd find people getting agitated by the power dynamics.

This is why we really only see polygamy in regions where women have no power. Middle-East, some crazy Mormon communities.

So why SHOULD Slavery be illegal? After all, the religious and traditional arguments are out the window...

Typical brainless idiotic response. :hmm:

 

[Infohawk]

So why SHOULD Slavery be illegal? After all, the religious and traditional arguments are out the window...

Typical brainless idiotic response. :hmm:

Don't get frustrated because your reading and reasoning skills aren't up to stuff. I'm thinking you probably didn't even read my full post.

Are you saying the only objections to slavery are religion and tradition? (Note I did not say "traditional arguments" I said "tradition." By "Tradition" I mean an argument that something is right because it's been done for a long time.)

Slavery is wrong. It is wrong because people should be free to control their own actions. This is not a religious argument and does pander to tradition. (Even if it is an old argument.)

Applying this to polygamy, we can't say that polygamy should be illegal because it's outlawed by our religion and we can't say that polygamy should be illegal because it has been for centuries in our country. But I think polygamy should be illegal and I give a reason why.

 

[nageov3t]

So why SHOULD Slavery be illegal? After all, the religious and traditional arguments are out the window...

Typical brainless idiotic response. :hmm:

slavery is the denial of free will and takes away fundamental human rights guaranteed by the governments of just about all major world powers.

I don't think the "omg, rich guys are gonna take all our womens" argument holds much water. I can't imagine there are that many women willing to share a husband and amongst those that are, it's not all that different than rich guys keeping a mistress or two on the side.

 

[MJinZ]

Don't get frustrated because your reading and reasoning skills aren't up to stuff. I'm thinking you probably didn't even read my full post.

Are you saying the only objections to slavery are religion and tradition? (Note I did not say "traditional arguments" I said "tradition." By "Tradition" I mean an argument that something is right because it's been done for a long time.)

Slavery is wrong. It is wrong because people should be free to control their own actions. This is not a religious argument and does pander to tradition. (Even if it is an old argument.)

Applying this to polygamy, we can't say that polygamy should be illegal because it's outlawed by our religion and we can't say that polygamy should be illegal because it has been for centuries in our country. But I think polygamy should be illegal and I give a reason why.

If I have to spell it out for you:

The Bible Condones Slavery
The Bible Condemns Homosexuality.

Now you make the statement that since Homosexual Marriage is now being legalized, there is no longer a need to rely on Religious sources as rationale.

The "logical" connection you just made amounts to - 'Because the Bible is now invalid for these types of social issues, there is no other possible source or reason to keep the legality/illegality of issues like Polygamy.'

Which, is not at all surprising given your Avatar and those most typical of religious leanings.

So then, you come up with no other reason (since the US no longer relies solely on your Bible for policy making), except possibly that "Ultimately it does come down to saying, you need to spread the wealth and you can't hog all the resources (woman). "

Thoughtless and typical. There can't be ANY other reason other than to spread the "wealth and resources" of another person (a woman) with other men, once God's word can't be trusted right?

I used Slavery as an example because back then, the Bible was used to justify slavery JUST LIKE the Bible is now used to justify the bans on Gay Marriage.

PS. I think you forgot that the Bible Condones Polygamy.

 

[Elias824]

I live in Utah and the few polygamists their are left live in the south. The problem with it is usually it isnt consenting, if you guys remember Elizabeth smart, she was supposed to marry that crazy dude that abducted her. Alot of the "marriages" they do are forced, and often to underage girls who have little choice in the matter, its basically a form of slavery.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Honestly, what sane man would want more than 1 wife?

Can you imagine getting nagged by 5 wives at the same time? "Take out the garbage!" "Yeah, take out the trash!" (Oh, that's right, it's probably the women's job to do all of that.)

 

[WhipperSnapper]

For the same reason as every other time this question gets asked. If we could have more than one wife, guys like me with enormous capacity would have all the women.

There are different kinds of "capacities". What specific type of capacity or capacities are you claiming you have? Please elaborate for us with graphic detail! Photographs of this "enormous capacity" would be even better!

 

[Throckmorton]

Can you imagine getting nagged by 5 wives at the same time? "Take out the garbage!" "Yeah, take out the trash!" (Oh, that's right, it's probably the women's job to do all of that.)

Exactly. Jokes aside, polygamy is by its nature patriarchal.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

you have to try the goat man, nothing even comes close.

Has anyone here ever seen the movie Zoo or seen any of the stallion-on-a-man anal sex videos that were shot out at Enumclaw starring "Mr. Hands"?

 

[AreaCode707]

I think marriage should be removed from government altogether and the government should issue cohabitation licenses for any two consenting adults, regardless of gender or romantic relationship status.

I don't think the government should extend legal benefits to more than a pair of consenting adults at a time because of the downstream effect of overextending benefits programs. Employers/government should not have to output benefits for an unlimited number of people based on a single person's input. There's no way to make that function predictably and we have to run our government on practicalities.

 

[MotF Bane]

I think marriage should be removed from government altogether and the government should issue cohabitation licenses for any two consenting adults, regardless of gender or romantic relationship status.

I don't think the government should extend legal benefits to more than a pair of consenting adults at a time because of the downstream effect of overextending benefits programs. Employers/government should not have to output benefits for an unlimited number of people based on a single person's input. There's no way to make that function predictably and we have to run our government on practicalities.

Why even go as far as "cohabitation licenses"? If I want to live with someone else in the same house, who is the government to say no, you can't have a cohabitation license.

 

[Elfear]

This is why we really only see polygamy in regions where women have no power. Middle-East, some crazy Mormon communities.

I've seen the reference three times now and I'd just like to point out that the groups practicing polygamy in southern Utah, Colorado, Texas, etc. are not Mormon, anymore than Lutherans are Catholic.

 

[JJ44]

Socially damaging.
Many laws are not from any source of Ethics or Morals, or even Natural Laws, but are simply Civics/Civil control.
Same thing with prostitution. There is no real reason why Prostitution is not legal, except it is socially damaging to dehumanize a person as a sex worker.

By that standard marriage between a man and a woman with 10 years age difference or difference in education or income is socially damaging becasue the person with "less" has less power and should be forbidden.

 

[kitchiku]

become a muslim, they allow up to 4 wives and as many concubines as you like as long as you can afford it.

 

[Drift3r]

genetic abnormalities. And in these polygamous communities there is a shortage of women for the men. Some will have 10 wives some none. Horny people make trouble.

I believe in other to avoid genetic abnormalities the trend in polygamist marriages needs to be reversed. As in 1 women with several male partners. This helps spread the genetic diversity so as to help avoid inbreeding. In the typical scenario where you have 1 guy with several women will eventually lead to a lot of people being related to each other. Though I can be corrected on this issue. I know I've read somewhere that if there were a doomsday scenario the human race would need only 1 female and many males to repopulate in a manner which avoids inbreeding. Something to do with how our genes are passed on I believe.

 

[AreaCode707]

Why even go as far as "cohabitation licenses"? If I want to live with someone else in the same house, who is the government to say no, you can't have a cohabitation license.

You misunderstand; it's not about the government saying yes or no, it's about getting the legal recognition of the fact that you ARE living together (as spouses, as parent-adult child, as roommates, etc.) so that you can share benefits.

 

[Lizardman]

1) It never turns out as nice as it may initially seem. In fact, most of them end up being fairly horrible circumstances (abuse, neglect, etc). Thus, it is a "protect yourself from yourself" law just like motorcycle helmet laws.

2) Our laws are frequently based upon religion and the majority of religious people in America don't support it.

3) Polygamy just sucks in large quantities. Think about it. I'll focus on men marrying multiple women but the same could be said for women marrying multiple men. Suppose the local top 10% of men (whether they are rich / famous / studs / whatever) each get 4 women on average. Suppose the next top 10% of men each get 3 women on average. Suppose the next top 10% of men each get 2 women on average. That leaves us with the bottom 70% of men fighting over the bottom 10% of women. The vast majority of men would have virually no chance of finding a single woman. That includes most of us in this thread. You end up with a bunch of desperate and angry men. The situtation doesn't work out well.

Sounds a lot like suvival of the fittest