SSM supporters: What do you think of polygamy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nodito
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
nodito said:
When one of the husbands started procreating with with or more of the wives, there would presumably be children living in the household with multiple dads and moms.
Click to expand...
Oh, sorry I misunderstood. I thought you meant someone might be marrying a child.

No, I don’t think children in general should factor into the decision to recognize polygamous families. Three or more people can live as a family and raise children legally now. They just aren’t recognized as married by the state.

There are many ways to raise children. Some better than others in many respects. I personally don’t think children should be raised to believe in one particular religious view. But we live in a free society where parents have the right to raise children how they see fit. And if the children are being cared for an not being abused then I’m not going to try to legislate my opinion.
 
Sparkythedog said:
Oh, sorry I misunderstood. I thought you meant someone might be marrying a child.

No, I don’t think children in general should factor into the decision to recognize polygamous families. Three or more people can live as a family and raise children legally now. They just aren’t recognized as married by the state.

There are many ways to raise children. Some better than others in many respects. I personally don’t think children should be raised to believe in one particular religious view. But we live in a free society where parents have the right to raise children how they see fit. And if the children are being cared for an not being abused then I’m not going to try to legislate my opinion.
Click to expand...
Are you of the belief then that a mother and a father are not necessary for the optimum development of a child? Depriving a child of a mother or father is not psychologically damaging?

Mary.
 
Indigo_Cardinal said:
I was talking to somebody about this, and I think where my brain was going was, “How could it be worked out?” For example, John and Jane are married. John wants to marry Sally. Does Jane have to give legal consent, or can John just marry Sally anyway? What if Jane also wants to marry Tom? What are John and Sally’s legal rights in this? What if Sally is bisexual, and wants to be married to both John and Jane, but later decides she wants to divorce John, but still be married to Jane, but Jane still wants to be married to both John and Sally?

My brain started to melt at this point. Maybe somebody else has this worked out, but I can’t see it.
Click to expand...
This. Legally speaking, polygamy is enormously complicated from everywhere from medical care decisions, to inheritance, to parenthood of children. Historically the only reason it “worked” at all is because it basically involved men ordering harems of women around. As a co-equal institution that marriage currently is, n>2 does not compute.

Plus the problem with introducing legal polygamy is that it would fundamentally change the character of monogamous marriages that already exist. You would throw the terms of practically every marriage into direct question.

It’s not inevitable nor does it “follow” from SSM, and no judge above a local or circuit level is going to impose it in the US in the next 100 years. You heard it hear first. No nation that has polygamous marriage has SSM, and no nation with SSM has polygamous marriage. They simply are not fellow travelers.
 
MaryT777 said:
Are you of the belief then that a mother and a father are not necessary for the optimum development of a child? Depriving a child of a mother or father is not psychologically damaging?

Mary.
Click to expand...
Polygamous marriages don’t deprive a child of a mother and a father. If anything you’re adding a few more mothers and fathers.

To you question, no I don’t believe children need their biological parents to thrive. What children need is love, support and stability. There are cases that I’ve seen where children are better off without the biological parents as in cases of abuse and neglect.
 
Sparkythedog said:
Polygamous marriages don’t deprive a child of a mother and a father. If anything you’re adding a few more mothers and fathers.

To you question, no I don’t believe children need their biological parents to thrive. What children need is love, support and stability. There are cases that I’ve seen where children are better off without the biological parents as in cases of abuse and neglect.
Click to expand...
My parents divorced when I was around 9. My father wasn’t around, like, ever. His choice. However, having a drug addict living with children would have been worse for me and my brother. I mean, he beat up his father for money when I was a teen. I’m thankful that he wasn’t living with me.
 
KendraDZ1902 said:
My parents divorced when I was around 9. My father wasn’t around, like, ever. His choice. However, having a drug addict living with children would have been worse for me and my brother. I mean, he beat up his father for money when I was a teen. I’m thankful that he wasn’t living with me.
Click to expand...
I’m really sorry to hear that. I can’t imagine what it would be like having a parent who behaves like that.
 
mjwise said:
It’s not inevitable nor does it “follow” from SSM, and no judge above a local or circuit level is going to impose it in the US in the next 100 years. You heard it hear first. No nation that has polygamous marriage has SSM, and no nation with SSM has polygamous marriage. They simply are not fellow travelers.
Click to expand...
Justice Roberts would disagree with you on this matter. In his dissenting opinion regarding the courts ruling on SSM he said:
It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage. …Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective “two” in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not. Indeed, from the standpoint of history and tradition, a leap from opposite-sex marriage to same-sex marriage is much greater than one from a two-person union to plural unions, which have deep roots in some cultures around the world.
Click to expand...
Further, given the Supreme Courts recent ruling, a polygamist man and his two wives in Montana have filled for a marriage license. It is now under review at the attorney generals office.
 
Janderich said:
Further, given the Supreme Courts recent ruling, a polygamist man and his two wives in Montana have filled for a marriage license. It is now under review at the attorney generals office.
Click to expand...
Cody Brown has efficiently sidestepped the issue by divorcing one wife, in order to marry another. All in a friendly manner, of course. In no-fault divorce, serial marriage can become another form of polygamy.

There is a South American country which legally recognizes three-party marriages, in which all three parties are married to each other, thus combining SSM and polygamy. Of course, this is only a civil marriage, not a religious marriage.
 
Jerusha said:
Cody Brown has efficiently sidestepped the issue by divorcing one wife, in order to marry another. All in a friendly manner, of course. In no-fault divorce, serial marriage can become another form of polygamy.

There is a South American country which legally recognizes three-party marriages, in which all three parties are married to each other, thus combining SSM and polygamy. Of course, this is only a civil marriage, not a religious marriage.
Click to expand...
The Cody Brown situation would likely not be acceptable to some who want legal protection and rights under law for their polygamous relationship, just as some SSM couples wanted legal recognition.
 
Janderich said:
The Cody Brown situation would likely not be acceptable to some who want legal protection and rights under law for their polygamous relationship, just as some SSM couples wanted legal recognition.
Click to expand...
Still a compromise. The US is going to have to compromise on the issue, protecting religious freedom by separating religious marriage from civil marriage.
 
Jerusha said:
Still a compromise. The US is going to have to compromise on the issue, protecting religious freedom by separating religious marriage from civil marriage.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure they’ll have to but I certainly hope they will.
 
I have read “consenting adults” on numerous occasions on this thread. That is a broad statement; I would like to see what people use to define an adult. Certainly the states definition of an 18 year old is subjected and it very certainly up for debate. There are some parts of the world where a 13 year old is considered an adult. Those of you who have stated “consenting adults”, how do you define that definition?

I have found the discussion in here so far very refreshing as its been civil and charitable. I want to state that I am not trying to bate people here, but further develop my understanding of other points of views.
 
Whenever threads on these “variations” of natural marriage come up, I’m literally jaw-dropped stunned at some of the responses. Especially, and I have to emphasize, especially when it comes to the well being and safety of the children involved with all these “experimental” family environments. There seems to be very little concern for the innocents in all this. Some people seem to just shrug them off as if they’re nothing more than collateral damage. .🤷 Truly amazing!

Peace, Mark
 
It is a slippery slope argument.

There are reasons for monogamy from Scripture, even if it is a same-sex couple. In the New Testament, we see that marriage is the full giving of one’s self to another. It represents the bond of Christ and his Church in this way – a bond that is complete and total. A polygamous group cannot fully give each other in love because that love must be split. It does not represent the total self-giving of Christ and his Church.
 
I’m for SSM but I’m against civil polygamy for the very simple reason that it creates a complex and nearly unworkable framework for the judicial system and the laws we have regarding marriage. And long term of enough engage in it it creates a gender imbalance.

That said, if a group of people are polyamorus, that’s fine I suppose provided everyone knows and consents. They can religiously or ceremonial marry for all I care. Whether or not it is a civil marriage one would presume they would effectively life as married anyways.

Anyways, if the consent issue was to given due diligence I think it would be a very small number of these marriages. Might be media bias, but I haven’t seen authorities raid too many polygamist compounds that didn’t have some really really bass stuff and coercion going on either.
 
nodito said:
No baiting, this is an honest question. If you support “same sex marriage,” what are your thoughts on polygamy? Just another life style choice? Right, wrong, or something else? I’m sincerely curious.
Click to expand...
That’s a very interesting question and one I have been wondering myself.

If you can redefine marriage to be between a man/man or woman/woman why cant you redefine marriage to be more than just a couple? I’m not talking about the cults who marry young children forcibly etc but there are relationships out there which involve more than two people which are consenting adults who love each other (which is enough to permit SSM?)
 
Indigo_Cardinal said:
I was talking to somebody about this, and I think where my brain was going was, “How could it be worked out?” For example, John and Jane are married. John wants to marry Sally. Does Jane have to give legal consent, or can John just marry Sally anyway? What if Jane also wants to marry Tom? What are John and Sally’s legal rights in this? What if Sally is bisexual, and wants to be married to both John and Jane, but later decides she wants to divorce John, but still be married to Jane, but Jane still wants to be married to both John and Sally?

My brain started to melt at this point. Maybe somebody else has this worked out, but I can’t see it.
Click to expand...
My head hurts! 🙂 I can see your point, but surely these complications you mention here as well as your previous post where you talk about polygamous relationships not working out - can also be applied to a marriage between TWO people. The details may be slightly different but the complication all the same. For example a man and woman marry - the man decides he wants to be a woman - what does the woman do? stay with the “man” she fell in love with (and still does) or leave because now he is a woman and she is not homosexual?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top