Gay Marriage vs Polygamy

[Grub]

For those in the United States that believe gay marriage should be the law, would you also favor legalizing polygamy? US residents can vote no matter how they feel regarding gay marriage.

[Ananke II]

If it's among consenting adults, why not? I'm thinking that the biggest problem might lie in how to treat it in regards to all the current legal benefits and obligations, which comes with marriage.

[Lakenburgh]

Out of curiosity do you expect a correlation between being pro gay marriage and the view on polygamy Grub?

[Pompadoodle]

Oops...sorry. I voted (for polygamy) and I'm not a US resident.

I don't see any problem with polygamy in principle, and making it illegal is an unnecessary, and therefore unacceptable, limitation on peoples freedom. Much like gay marriage in that respect.

It could lead to some very complex court cases though.

And lets be clear: women should be allowed multiple husbands, as well as men being allowed multiple wives. Also, multiple gay marriages are fine.

[Hockeynutville]

I voted yes simply because neither same-sex marriage or polygamy is a threat to our standard of life or civilization.

I do also think there is a difference here. In homosexuality, it isn't a choice unless you're a drunk college kid being experimental. Being attracted to the same sex is a biological difference in that something in the brain is hard-wired differently. We don't shun people for being left-handed even though the majority are right-handed and could be considered "natural". I didn't choose to be right-handed, just as I didn't choose to be heterosexual. It was something that was in my brain before I was even born. Why should I be denied the same rights and freedoms as everyone else for something I didn't choose? Should we also deny rights to people born without limbs or with a genetic predisposition to cancer? I'm sure if you asked them, they'd have chosen the easier path.

Now, I'm sure that men will agree that we've all at some point in our adolescence had fantasies of having multiple women at the same time. In some cases men do when they make the choice to have an affair or seeing multiple partners at the same time. Most of us make the choice to be monogamous. Hell, one is hard enough to keep up with . But just because it is the choice we made doesn't automatically make it the right choice. Polygamy has been going on for a very long time, long before the Bible or any other code of generally accepted moral conduct existed. Now I can't say how it works outside of the US, but I would imagine that if a Man or Woman lived in a polygamous society and wanted to move away and practice monogamy here that it wouldn't be too hard. If Polygamy is your thing, there are places here in the US or in the world where you can go and get your thing on. Ultimately that choice will not endanger or hurt society, not like the same way choosing to drink and drive can.

Do I agree with polygamy? Nope.

Do I think it is my place or anyone else's to decide the "relations" others have with their partner(s)? Nope.

[Grub]

Aug 5, 2010 17:48:30 GMT -5 Hockeynutville said:

We don't shun people for being left-handed even though the majority are right-handed and could be considered "natural". I didn't choose to be right-handed, just as I didn't choose to be heterosexual.

This should probably go in the gay marriage thread, but I think it's important to state that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. The Bible is quite clear about that.

People can disregard the Bible, but it doesn't make it any less true. As a society, we can ignore God, but we do it at our own peril.

Being gay & left handed are not comparable. If someone was attracted to someone else of the same sex, it is the acting upon that attraction that would be the sin. The same goes for stealing. It's a big difference between if I thought about stealing something vs actually stealing something. For HNV and others, I'm sure you don't see those two things as one being wrong and one being right. I am going off of the Bible and the Bible is very clear which way God thinks about homosexuality.

[Lakenburgh]

I'm not so sure about the "only if you act on it part" Grub.
Seeing that if I remember correctly the 9th and 10th commandment already declare even the thought behind certain things as against his will.
I guess the same counts for homosexuals feelings and if not it can't be that great a sin in his view, if its less important than being interested in your neighbours wife and other belongings.

[Hockeynutville]

Aug 5, 2010 20:09:39 GMT -5 Grub said:

This should probably go in the gay marriage thread, but I think it's important to state that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. The Bible is quite clear about that.

It could even probably end up in the Evidence of God thread. I'll just respond to your last post Grub and then let others comment.

It's clear where your faith lies Grub and I could debate you all day long and we'd certainly get no where, just as I'm sure you feel the same about myself. I would like to know if your question is more from a government of laws created by men or if your basis of what modern law should and shouldn't be straight out of the Bible? Clearly although the US was founded by men and women of predominant christian backgrounds, we now have in the nation people from creeds and cultures that encompass many different religious and spiritual backgrounds. Obviously freedom of worship is something that makes the US a great country among the freedoms cherished here. Also, as time has progressed and the world has evolved, the separation of Church and State has meant that although there are many people of faith voting to enact laws, the Church itself is no longer directly creating the laws.

I certainly will respect those who believe in the Bible or any religious book or script as I would expect the same treatment for my beliefs. As far as impulse and acting on being gay and impulse and acting on an impulse to steal something there is a fundamental difference and I already stated my point on it.

Anyways, I don't to get much deeper on it here but I would be interested to debate with you further on one of the other threads Grub.

In regards to the original question of this thread, were you attempting to make a correlation between the two other than they are both sins in the bible or was there another angle you were looking for?

[Echolilia]

I think gay marriage should be legal, but not that it should be law

Yes, polygamy should be legal too. Government just plain doesn't belong in the marriage business. Though there are a bunch of things needed to get there, starting with single payer health coverage.

So much for public policy. In the realm of morality, I neither know nor care to know if any homosexual acts fall into the subset of sexual immoralities that the Bible applies to non-Jews. With regard to polygamy and polyandry, they clearly not forbidden to non-Jews, since the Bible provides no recognition of non-Jewish marriages.

For Jews, it is very clear that at least some male homosexual acts are forbidden, as is male-to-female transsexual surgery (including neutering of male pets). I've heard a lesbian argue that any female homosexual acts are at worst only Rabbinically forbidden, and arguably not even that, but have no actual knowledge there.

Polyandry (again, for Jews) is just straightforward adultery, and forbidden. Polygamy is clearly allowed by the Bible, but if I recall correctly in order to give proper sexual attention to each wife is recommended to be limited to four. However, about a thousand years ago, Rabbinical authorities in Europe under the leadership of Rabbeinu Gershom enacted a ban on polygamy (and also bans on divorcing a woman against her will, reading other people's mail, and a number of other acts) that is considered binding on all Jews of European descent today.

[Bad Infinitum]

Aug 5, 2010 20:09:39 GMT -5 Grub said:

Aug 5, 2010 17:48:30 GMT -5 Hockeynutville said:

We don't shun people for being left-handed even though the majority are right-handed and could be considered "natural". I didn't choose to be right-handed, just as I didn't choose to be heterosexual.

This should probably go in the gay marriage thread, but I think it's important to state that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God. The Bible is quite clear about that.

People can disregard the Bible, but it doesn't make it any less true. As a society, we can ignore God, but we do it at our own peril.

I agree with your logic completely (though it ain't my dharma), but I'm missing something. If it's a sin, and these people are going to hell for being who they are, WHY DO YOU CARE? It's their problems, their lives, their eternity. Just break down a wall and take over their condo in heaven.

Aug 5, 2010 20:09:39 GMT -5 Grub said:

Being gay & left handed are not comparable. If someone was attracted to someone else of the same sex, it is the acting upon that attraction that would be the sin.

I've actually heard the opposite argument from a number of gay Christians: They say it would be a greater sin to deny who they are to themselves and those around them.

[Anime Daisuki]

I'm against polygamy.

[Hockeynutville]

^ I'm just curious to know AD, is it from a religious moral standpoint or just a self moral standpoint?

[Anime Daisuki]

Self-moral stand point. Also, I can see society getting more problematic if everyone is allowed to take more than 1 husband or wife. There's probably going to be more neglected children, and violence stemming from jealousy, etc.

[Pompadoodle]

Regardless of whether it is true or not, the Bible is not the correct document to be consulting when deciding what should or should not be legal in the US. Nor, for that matter is the Koran, or the latest book by Richard Dawkins. The correct document to look at is the US Constitution.

[Sheynat]

Assuming that all involved are consenting and above the age of 18, I see no reason to forbid polygamy. Rulon/Warren Jeffs style polygamy involves women who were not consenting and underage. This should not be legal. And to reiterate what Pompadoodle said, what the Bible says shouldn't influence American lawmaking. There's even an amendment to the Constitution about that.

[Takaram]

Personally, I think that both situations are not the government's business. I don't personally care about traditional marriage ceremonies and such, but the legal rights and benefits should not be restricted to a certain group of people based upon their sexuality. I would say that there are no legal arguments that can be made in the US against gay marriage.
Polygamy is a complicated situation though. I have no specific issues with it, although I'm not sure I would want to be in a polygamous relationship. However, there are many issues that could stem from allowing such relationships. Though I voted yes in the poll, I would say that it would have to be done in a very careful manner.

[Cerb]

I'm going to side step the gay marriage issue because I've made my views on that clear in other threads.


I can only see polygamy as being necessary if there is a shortage of males and you are attempting to populate an area. I think it can lead to an increased chance of genetic diseases in future generations as the chances of a shared paternal relative increases. I suppose I can't object to a woman having half a dozen husbands but I'd give that about a week before there was bloodshed.

A mormon lady once told my wife that she wished her husband could marry her so that they could be sisters. To me this just sounds fundamentally "wierd".

I can not see a good biological or theological reason for legalizing it.

[Lakenburgh]

Well spreading the genes of the dominant male to a high number of females isn't that unusual in the animal kingdom. The whole relative/incest has to be avoided at any cost thing is a very human concept and not even we really cared that much for a long time.

[Cerb]

True, but there is a tendancy to have a higher proportion of females to males in herd creatures. Furthermore they don't bother with trivial ideals like marriage.

It strikes me that as there is a roughly 50/50 balance between males and females this would appear to be the way we are biologically suited.

If we regressed back to the pack most of us wouldn't get a look in and there would only be guys like the governator of california getting the "lion's share".

[Takaram]

Indeed, I'm pretty certain that humans pretty much evolved as a more monogamous species, which would make sense given the roughly even ratio of men to women.

[Inquirius]

There are plenty of arrogant men out there who think that they can keep more than one woman happy. Let the poor chumps give it a try. What business is it of mine? However, if this experiment were to be undertaken, the government's way of acknowledging marriage needs to change. How difficult it would be to coordinate divorces, especially if five women wanted to divorce one man at the same time! Or if five men suddenly got tired of living with the same one woman!

If the definition of marriage were to be loosened this much, we should tweak one more aspect of it: its duration. Make it a contract for four years, for example. Every four years, have it re-certified between each pair of people. Or, if you're tired of the arrangement, let the contract expire and find a new mate or mates. Leave the religious aspect of it between you and your favorite god.

Of course, our civilization is too frightened and too Bible-obsessed to try something like this. Far be it from us to try something new to enhance our well-being and happiness. Besides, if we legalize gay marriage and polygamy, we might then legalize child marriage, which would then obviously lead to inter-species marriage, which would necessitate the government acknowledging human/mollusk sexual pairings. It would be terrible.



MMMMM snails. The next poll should be about whether we approve of humans marrying snails. Because that makes as much sense as the leap from gay marriage to polygamy.

[Lakenburgh]

@cerb and Takaram

It would mostly make sense because using our brains and developing tools, we managed effectively to block the biggest pressure for the whole dominant male thing. Tools and Inventions made it possible not only the strongest survive, but even the weaker or just the more clever ones. Still this wouldn't negate certain biological instincts for men to well mate a lot (which certainly lots of us still want to do) even if society deems it no longer as desirable.

If this development is because god wanted this for humankind or because we just managed due to several mutations in the right direction to not eliminate but weaken the factor that drives lot of species to do it, is certainly a discussion no one will ever solve.

[Free Guns For All]

Aug 5, 2010 16:11:56 GMT -5 Grub said:

For those in the United States that believe gay marriage should be the law, would you also favor legalizing polygamy? US residents can vote no matter how they feel regarding gay marriage.

Is it okay if I voice my opinion, since I'm in Australia?

'Coz personally, I'm for both gay marriage AND polygamy. I will practice neither, but what business is it of mine what they get up to? I don't care if it's seen as a sin in the hands of God, I say go for it (then again, I'm an atheist).

[Takaram]

Aug 9, 2010 23:51:57 GMT -5 Free Guns For All said:

Aug 5, 2010 16:11:56 GMT -5 Grub said:

For those in the United States that believe gay marriage should be the law, would you also favor legalizing polygamy? US residents can vote no matter how they feel regarding gay marriage.

Is it okay if I voice my opinion, since I'm in Australia?

'Coz personally, I'm for both gay marriage AND polygamy. I will practice neither, but what business is it of mine what they get up to? I don't care if it's seen as a sin in the hands of God, I say go for it (then again, I'm an atheist).

I think you mean the eyes of God, but yeah, I agree with you there. If it really is a sin against an existing deity, then I suppose I'll find out eventually.

[Shelter from the Storm]

Frankly, I couldn't care less if four men, three women and a donkey got married, as long as you could prove to me that the donkey was capable of informed consent and all involved were consensual.

[Magthere]

I'm for legalizing gay marriage but against Polygamy.

A multiple husbands/wives scenarios is impossible to manage PROPERLY, it would turn into a logistics nightmare for the court and legal systems in terms of both divorces, guardianship, who's the parent, how closely people are related, etc...

Not to mention marriage would then become more like high school relationships, and you all know what happens with high school relationships, they get turned into crappy TV shows and movies that torture us for all eternity...

Of course I may just be paranoid but yeah...

[Pompadoodle]

Frankly, if polygamy did become legal, I doubt if many people would have multiple spouses.

[ussa]

I don't know I think the most famous poligimers are Mormons who happen to be from...

Mars

However I want people to be happy then let them be happy...

So yes I support Polygamy.

[Pompadoodle]

Thats my position too- if something makes people happy and it doesn't hurt any third parties, then theres no reason for it to be illegal.

[La Vida De Sangre]

Agreed.
If that's what they want - they have a right to get it. That doesn't bother my in any way, so there's no reason to object.