@wogsland IMO, you've oversimplified polygamy by only looking at the semitic model. It is possible for one person to have two different partners in two different locations, for one woman to have a harem of men, or for a hippie communal "free love" arrangement.
As long as all parties are of the age of consent and knowingly consent to the situation, who cares? Again, its a "mind your own business" situation.
In marriage, what are your thoughts on 3rd, 2nd, or 1st cousins ... or siblings?
@terceldude If you mean interspecies marriage it is impossible to know whether the other species enters into the marriage contract with full consent.
If you mean the sex act, then because it is impossible for other species to communicate with humans it is impossible for them to petition for rights. Therefor, a human practicing bestiality is not violating anybody's rights and is committing no crime..
...YES...YES...but two mothers in law sounds scarry....and why do you have a problem with the mormons?....i bet that you don´t dare to have a problem with africans....so you play it safe....and have a problem with mormons....but if two men can marry...then seven men should be abel to marry too....
...YES...YES...but two mothers in law sounds scarry....and why do you have a problem with the mormons?....i bet that you don´t dare to have a problem with africans....so you play it safe....and have a problem with mormons....but if two men can marry...then seven men should be abel to marry too....
@Lynnmist why are some lifestyles the Bible condones legal and the others not?! It's unfair, it's prejudiced, it's not right morally, and other stuff...
I am gay and I think polygamy should be legal between consenting adults. I believe in free choice. Why limit someone else's potential for happiness when it doesn't affect you?
Your statements are belittling and unreasonable. From other threads you've mentioned that monogamy marriages are traditional marriages and changing that would lead to ruin of family, etc. If you read history you would see that polygamy has also been part of marriage and in fact America CHANGED the standards of marriage to be MONOGAMY. So if not changing marriage is what you call healthy marriage for the U.S., then America has already failed that by YOUR standards.
soon u will b able 2 marry ur fridge or washing machine, & then ur dog or cat, u could even marry an Ant, ( (not Aunt) well not yet anyway,) & when the ant dies u can have all the inheratance left 2 ur estate, so then the age limit will b lowered &u can marry children no matter how old; used to be known as paedophilia but times are a changin (bit by bit). I prefer to just stick to the traditional Marriage myself... At least I know thats how I got here.
I don't think it is more double standards to be pro same sex marriages and not pro polygamy, or the other way around. It IS different things. Well, to be honest, I think it is a little double standards, but not more so than having heteromonogamous marriages, but not any of the other types. Either all marry, or none! It is absurd to have normal marriage, and not allow gays to marry. Genders are irrelevant. Not allowing polygamy... I understand that thought, but it is very uncool.
Not allowing gays to marry, though, that is just absurd.
Gay marriage is the exact same thing, in every relevant way. Two people (we cannot set boundaries for genders and skin color and such things) that want to become one.
Polygamy is indirectly the same thing, two people wanting to become one... then another person wanting to become one with that entity :D But it is also something new and good. It removes the absurd notion that love is bad or wrong or immoral.
Love never is, not even if you have it for more than one person at the same time (we're talking about sexual romantic love here). Polygyny (one man, several women), of course is a bit stupid, worse than monogamy, since it both set boundaries for love (one man... I call it "monoandry" :D ), and it is also unfair and unjust, in that women are denied the same right. Marriage mostly starts with polygyny, but has to go through monogamy in order to get to good, gender neutral polygamy.
In monogamy, equality is learned. The last part of that phase is to allow same sex marriages. When that is done, we are set for evolution to the next level. Polygamy is the best, because you can do what you want, and there is no better thing to want than real, true love.
However, difficult legislation should not mean poly is WRONG or that you don't tackle the issue and figure it out, esp. when there's LOVE and consenting adults involved that you're dictating what relationship they can be in (freedom of happiness?? why not for all consenting adults and no harm involved?).
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for?
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for? Difficult legislation should not equal WRONG
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for? Difficult legislation should not equal WRONG
Polygamy is OK because it is supported in the Holy Bible. It is clearly within the definition of traditional Judeo-Christian marriage. This is what God says, so if you disagree, you are wrong.
Depends how you interpret it, perhaps, but I agree that polygamy is ok, and I agree that the Bible says it is ok, but I don't agree that the first is because of the latter. Polygamy is ok because it is a good thing. Perhaps that is why the Bible says it is ok, too, but if a thing is bad, it's not ok, simply because the Bible says so. Luther, who designed our protestantic christianity, also agreed to the Bible not saying polygamy was wrong, and saw itself obliged to marry three people.
You're right. I can think of no principled reason to say "two guys can marry but 3 or 7 guys can't form a 7 way marriage". and then if there can be same sex plural marriage then why can't straight people have plural marriages? This does NOT open the door to humans marrying animals or toasters or coffee tables because animals and toasters cannot give provable consent to marriage.
@barrytubes all sex aside. I would have no interest in being in a um legal relationship with so many people so I cant speak on why someone else would. I see marriage as sharing assets and property rights and creating a single life together. Any two people is a partnership. 50/50. The more people involved makes your wonder who's life is benefitting and who's isnt. thus polygamy in itself doesnt appear equal in itself because it can't divided as such. At least ONE gets the upper hand
Polygamy, in contrast to gay marriage, leads to demonstrable harm. It can't be separated from exploitation of women and expulsion of large numbers of teen boys from the polygamist community. That’s the reason society and its government are justified in prohibiting polygamy, even in a fully democratic nation. It’s impossible to educate people not to be gay, but we can educate or enculturate them not to become polygamists, or even want to.
Polygamy has nothing to do with exploitation of women. I believe you are really thinking of polygyny (plural wives), not polygamy (plural marriage... that doesn't even have to include any women). I believe you can practice polygyny in a sound way, respecting and loving the women, but the very nature of it, giving some rights to the one gender, and denying them to the other gender, on no merits of their own, is systematic exploitation. PolyGAMY, however, is a good thing.
Law and morality are different points entirely... I (21 year old heterosexual male) am infavour of homosexual marriages and to the same extent poligamist marriages. So long as certain criteria are enforced. One that they are all legally responcible (18-21+) and that everyone is consenting to that type of relationship...
Although personally I would find it hard to live in a poligamous relationship. (I get jelous easily) I feel that is by no means a reason to discriminate against others...
The church is one place where people can get married. There are others. Marriage under different authorities give different rights. The church decides if it is to let gays, or polygamists get married... but it SHOULD let them, that is the only right decision. BUT: There should always be a church alternative that allows this, in accordance with human rights. That is why it is good to have a state religion, such as we have in Norway (even though they don't do it here yet :D )
Monogamy is not ok, because it teaches us not only that setting boundaries for love is ok, but even that this is the only acceptable way, and our culture is potent in brainwashing us, too, through hollywood movies, books, peoples opinions, and stuff.
There are some types of religious nuts' polyGYNY that is like what you describe, but be more precise than just say that polygamy is like that.
From its inception, marriage was about a person’s right to convey their property, inheritance and benefits to another person. Until women obtained equality, love was rarely a factor in marriage. They were arranged. Women had no say. The only thing 2 people cannot do without being married is automatically convey their property, inheritance and benefits to another person not related by blood. The issue then of whom a person should marry is not about sex nor about love. The issue is about trust.
Youre attempting to create a moral discussion when homosexuals are debated a legal one. Homosexual and have been and will continue to have relationships and commit to those relationships as well as have families. The reason for making it legal is to protect them legally when it comes to longterm benefits, taxes, children and assets etc. Polygamy wouldnt be so much a marriage as it would be a conglomerate. In cases of divorce, or other legal matters it could be messy.
But others should. The government doesn't need to make up a bunch of new laws dealing with this stuff. Plus it would be taken advantage of and people would marry others simply for the benefits. While this happens today, it's more of a hit-or-miss situation.
Plus think of the children when it comes to divorce. Having to live in 3+ different households isn't good.
Eventhough some would be in polygamy just for marital tax benefits, but I still don't see it right to restrict and punish those who be in polygamy for love just for the actions of a few. The government can put a cap on how much benefits a couple can get if they have reasonable suspicion that a couple is just marrying for benefits like if there's lots of spouses involved and NO children, etc.
Or better yet, the government doesn't have to guarantee anyone any of these benefits and perhaps they should stay out of marriage completely, at least when it comes to 'benefits'.
I'd agree with you if I saw a rational reason for making a relationship between CONSENTING ADULTS a 'criminal' or 'illegal'. I also fail to see why wouldn't those in poly relationships (which historically is a form of marriage right along side polygamy) can not fight to also have their relationships legally recognized and also given benefits, tax breaks, etc. Sure legislation may be difficult but so was drafting the Constitution, doesn't mean u ignore it rather than figure it out.
You're right to a degree depending on where we're talking about was influenced. The Romans had some influence on the Christian practices but after the Roman Empire died out, it was just the Christian Church for the large part that influenced Western Civilization. That can be seen in part in the US which if we're honest is still why we don't have gay marriage and polygamy. Homosexual acts were not banned in the Roman Empire btw, many of the Emperors had male child sex slaves.
But, after gay marraige, and polygomy...what next Peadophilia (they could say it's genetic too), goat love, a polygimist gay marriage between an adult man, and a yearling goat, and a blowfly?
I am not saying this because of my faith, because I am not religious. I am saying this on a moral stand point. I believe that it is morally wrong to allow polygamy because once you start saying it's ok for more than 2 people to be married to each other at once, than you start making room for it to be alright for someone to abandon one for the other. Or the other or the other....
Marriage to me is not many coming to please 1. Marriage is 2 working together to create a loving home.
Say you have 5 people that end up getting married. 1 man and 4 women and the guy has a few kids with each woman. Say that 2 of the women decided they don't want to be married to the guy anymore for whatever reason and want to find someone else. How do you divide up the assets without screwing over everyone? The 2 women win, the guy must spend double in child supportand what not and then he goes broke and can't support his other 2 wives.
Sorry- those (RLDS) are not real Mormons-dont confuse the two. LDS members don't allow polygamy ( I dont even know how to spell it) Anyway I think you are right about that being the next step. The world has gone crazy!
Not all monogamous relationships are loving. Some couples mention that the love tends to lessen or die out eventually. I believe you can have true love in both monogamy and polygamous relationships but in polygamy it's just a matter of how much time the man offers to share the love with each wife.
Polygamy, polyandry, plural marriage or whatever...I think it's fine, as long as like you said, no marriage of children to adults like those sick sex cults do. The human reproductive system is not geared for total monogamy, both males and females seek variety. Not to be gross or anything, but I know I could never restrict myself to only one mate.
The gov't should choose who you love even if it's 4 ppl or 1 person. You have the right to love any one or as many ppl you want. The gov't should be able to tell you who to love.
Hmm, let's see...this video was done on 5/21/08, and since then, Proposition 8 has passed (by the voters...who don't agree with you...and are the majority) and the California Supreme court has upheld it...
Let's see now...is the gay "marriage" debate over NOW? LMAO
Tell me more about this (prop 8) trend continuing across the country... LMAO
I love that arrogant little smile at 3:17...such ignorant confidence...
@mkmason2002 This is for you to think on. Sodomy is, by definition, any sexual intercourse held to be abnormal. In AL (where I reside), sodomy is defined as any unnatural sex act and is illegal. Also, this law applies to oral sex. This is probably similar in most states. Imagine how much whining and belly-aching the self professed righteous would be doing if they were jailed and dragged into court over a blow job.
Maybe the goings on in your bedroom should be under public scrutiny!
Marriage should only have three rules1. legal age of consent, human and mental able to sign a contract......number of people, race, or sex should not be an issue.
Jesus said sodomy is an abomination. Sodomy is nothing short of sado-maschism. Sex involving poop is mental illness. Work in an ER for awhile & see what comes in, sodomites shoving everything but the kitchen sink up their rectum. The AMA called homosexuality a "mania before the "gay" lobby forced political correctness. 90% of homosexual men have had sex with boys 12 or under. Sodomites die on average by 42.
Why not three, four, or however many people? I don't understand how 1 guy is shared by 2 girls, and i wouldn't share my girlfriend with another man, but their might be many practical applications for multiple partners. Say you have a household of 3 people all married. 2 have busy jobs and one takes care of the house and children, of their own free will. Its not a lifestyle that I can understand or would choose to have, but I'm an astronomer and not a TV journalist for those same reasons.
I am a married heterosexual male and have no problem with either gay marriage or polygamy. Frankly I don't know how polygamists do it, one woman is enough headache for me.LOL
Check on an college campus. You'll find a GLBT group that says "Gay" and "Straight" aren't the only two sexual orientations. Gay marriage opens a new door to marriage among other sexual orientations as well. In fact, the GLBT acronym doesn't even cover them all--just most of the adult/human ones. So---now we're back to legal vs. illegal sexual orientations. Do you think those guys from NAMBLA will start sending lobbyists and ACLU lawyers to Washington?
Both polygamy and gay marriage can involve marital relationships involving 2 or more consenting adults. I'm not aware of any harm that is directly a result of polygamy or homosexuality other than it being a matter depending on who or how it's practiced. I just disagree with same-sex marriage primarily based on religious belief but that's another story.
You're being unreasonable. People should not see polygamy as being bizarre because it has been practiced since antiquity, even way back in biblical times. It's only a new consideration to us or seems that way to American culture because our culture is not used to it. I'm a Christian so my moral standards don't really allow for me to accept gay marriage is okay, but I know at least that since it is legal in some states, then I also don't see why hold back on polygamy.
I'm LDS, let me start by saying I'm glad our church banned polygamy back in the 1800's, I wish they would have done so sooner, but whatever. As to gay marriage, I couldn't care less what two consenting adults want to do with each other, it doesn't effect me and I'd be pissed if someone was telling me what I can and can't do behind closed doors. So yes, I guess if I'm ok with gay marriage being legal then I'm ok with polygamy being legal. Neither are for me but neither effect me.
Listen, I hate to break this to you but marriage has already been redefined in 5 states. Therefore the old definition of marriage being between a man and a woman in those 5 states is totally invalid.
Knowing this it will be mandatory that the definition of marriage take on its new meaning
in reference books such as the dictionary. Publishers have no choice to rewrite in the new definition or they can be faced with legal charges of discrimination.
I'm a gay man in an 8+ year monogamous relationship. If we fall in love with another person, I see no reason to stop that from happening. Love is love. There's enough love for everyone. The hardest part would probably be deciding what's for dinner with all of the opinions.
Polygamy is perfectly moral. Consenting adults have the right to live their life as they want.
I will let you know one thing, mormons are NOT poligymists... that is a high myth about the mormons they are not allowed to have 7 wifes so please stop talking BS about Mormons. Poligamy is ok in a sense I mean look at Roseanne & Tom Arnold they had a threeway coupling. But I say to each their own and the government shouldnt have any say over who can marry who. Now if a guy wants to marry a guy that should be their business and they happen to want to include their "cabana boy" then Oh Well.
A better solution would be to get the federal government OUT of the business of marriage all together. That way, if no one is hurting anyone else's rights, then so be it. Polygamous unions are married in the sense that they consider themselves to be such, but the government just doesn't recognize it. If the government simply got out of the marriage business, then the whole gay marriage thing and the polygamous marriage thing would all just go away.
@mkmason2002 I wouldn't say that a gay couple is "abnormal." It is just not the norm by your standards. We don't choose who are parents are. I was born into a very poor family, but I don't complain about my right to have two wealthy parents. When my parents got divorced I didn't argue my right to have the typical "nuclear family." We make the best of the situations we are dealt. I see no disadvantage to having "abnormal" parents. If anything it makes you stronger.
@joeyramone9 You are wrong. Sodomy is abnormal. Sodomy is sadistic & masochistic. Sex involving poop=excrement, golden showers & fisting is a filthy PERVERSION. Your butt hole was meant to excrete poop and that is all. No tongue, no penis no foreign objects, get it? Now if you can't understand that then I think you're equally as mentally sick.
@joeyramone9 How is it that a child being brought up without a mother but instead two men who sodomize each other going to make a child "stronger?" You sound like a real nutjob.
@mkmason2002 About the sodomy, its not for me, but if other people want to do it why should anyone want to stop them? If you think it is a "perversion" that is your opinion. No need to force it on others. Your debate on the child being stronger is irrelevant. Strait parents also have anal sex. Its bedroom stuff. That doesn't have any factor on a child's upbringing. The one thing you do have right is that I am 19, although not a pervert. That would be a judgment, which is a biblical sin. bravo!
@joeyramone9 I visited your site, and I stand by my statement, you're a teenage pervert and at the rate you're going you'll probably grow up to be an adult pervert. BTW, you're a pottymouth. Grow up.
@joeyramone9 To "judge" in the Greek NT means to "pass judgement on & to then sentence, to have the ability to execute that judgement," which would be hell and I have no power to cast someone into hell, so I was not "judging" you. I love how atheists quote the Bible. What a little wimp you are.
@mkmason2002 I love how Christians shove their religion on everyone because they think it is right. You can use whatever definition you want to make yourself feel better about your own faith, but I can think for myself. I don't need a book to tell me how to live or how to think. I have my own morals and those don't involve chastising others for how they choose to live. If you want to be christian thats fine, but stop trying to convert the world. Its annoying.
@mkmason2002 This is for you to think on. Sodomy is, by definition, any sexual intercourse held to be abnormal. In AL (where I reside), sodomy is defined as any unnatural sex act and is illegal. Also, this law applies to oral sex. This is probably similar in most states. Imagine how much whining and belly-aching the self professed righteous would be doing if they were jailed and dragged into court over a blow job.
Maybe the goings on in your bedroom should be under public scrutiny!
@joeyramone9 What about a child's right to 2 normal parents & not be laughed at in school for having queers as parents? Sodomy causes AIDS, & that has affected us all. AIDS originated from homosexual sodomy period. How many millions have now died from their blood transfusions? The hate crime leg. will put me in jail for disagreeing with their filthy lifestyle.
@mkmason2002 Alright, since you didn't understand me the first time I'll try to dumb myself down for you. If it wasn't for ignorant fucks such as yourself, kids would not be laughed at in school for having homosexual parents. Sodomy does not cause AIDS. It can be transferred that way. AIDS started from monkeys. If you donate blood, first they don't let you if you practice sodomy, second they test the blood so no AIDS. As for the hate crimes legislation, don't be a drama queen. You're safe.
Polygamy is only possible when one gender is repressed enough to accept it. Gay marriage has nothing to do with it. If you want multiple partners don't get married, or if you want polygamy then you are free to travel somewhere else. But if you say things that contradict the moral code, including that you accept gay marriage, in pro-polygamist parts of the world you will get the chop. Just because we are tolerant enough to accept gays doesn't mean you should disrespect all our other beliefs.
Hey, if more than two people can make it work then more power to them. Id think the odds are not good... hell, the odds are not good with just two, and the potential for chaos has got to rise exponentially with each additional partner...
But that's a reason to avoid it, not a reason to forbid it.
I'm against allowing gay marriage. Why? I have many reasons, but my biggest concern is for it leading to worse types of marriages, like polygamy, I mean, if gays want their rights, why cant people have the right to marry their sister of grandmother?
Without invoking religious backup, mind. Remember- Church and State are two different things now, and its discrimination to enforce the morals of one religion on everyone.
Polygamy (multiple marriage) is only immoral insofar as it breaks the law. If that law were revoked or changed, polygamy would no longer be immoral.
Morals are a human invention, not long lasting. It isn't so because someone in a pulpit says its so.
@mkmason2002 Of course, that's the Christian God... should Hindus be held to that same standard? Atheists? The argument isn't with God because God isn't the one trying to force everyone to do what He said 3,000 years ago... it's His children who are trying to force His commandments on others.
@decoy256 There's ONLY ONE God. He said sodomy is a sin. He doesn't care what religion you're into. It doesn't change His laws, His truth. Just because YOU don't believe in His laws doesn't change it's truthfulness. His children are trying to show you that sin is harmful. Sodomites have the highest suicide rate in the world, AIDS, veneral diseases, Korsopi cancer, on and on. Sex involving poop is filthy & sick. Why do they kill themselves? Guilt.
@Treemeadow : Marriage in the United States and many countries is based on Christianity. I am not anti-gay, nor am i a Christian, etc. however, as it is a Christian institution and the act is a Christian concept, gay marriage actually has no justifiable foundation.
One of the only times i recall ever agreeing with this institution of religion.
I'm a romantic,. It merely tells the world you have chosen that person to be with. Strangely, true love does seem to follow monogamy.
@Treemeadow i hope you know that polygamy is a common mormon practice and mormons are a denomination of christianity..... not exactly anti-christian. and there are many people out there that are not christian, even athiest, think that its bad.
@bluedog454 It is NOT a common mormon practice. It has been outlawed by Mormonism for some time. It is, however, a common Fundamentalist Mormon practice.
Mormon's are not technically recognised by the rest of christianity, but at least they try and stay true to their roots.
And I agree, a lot of non-christians think it is bad as well, but the modern-day practice of monogamy sprung from Christianity.
@Treemeadow yeah but its is no longer just a christian belief. society as a whole now accepts monogamy and doesn't approve of polygamy. majority wins, and that majority includes lots of non-christians.
@Treemeadow Romans only had one wife to one man, The Greeks only had one wife to one man (Macedonians excepted)
Both predate Chritianity
So how did monogamy come from being Christian? (You could easily argue that it spread from the influence of the Roman empire) at least that would explain why, when Russia became Christian they still initially kept polygamy as a common practise...tsar Vladimir who forced his people to become Christian kept 900 wives reportedly...Ivan the Terrible too.
It's completely unnatural. You know deep in your heart that there is something wrong with marrying multiple women. It goes against the definition of marriage.
Who said multiple women, either. It might be two men marrying one woman, or any combination.
Why is it unnatural? In the wild, animal packs often consist of one Alpha and the rest all mate with him. Nature isn't a good example for your argument.
It IS worth arguing. Just like Civil Rights for African Americans was worth arguing.
Anyone can write an essay, doesn't mean they're right.
Furthermore- why haven't you used points from your essay? Intelligence trumps emotion in debate. You have only based your arguments on what you feel, not on facts.
The central question concerns the purpose of marriage: whay does it accomplish. If any number or type of persons want to cohabit and coo and hold hands, the end of that is, what, happiness? But if the long-term, loftier project of marriage is the rearing of children, then that must be recognized, rewarded, and supported, since children are the future--the workers, taxpayers, fellow citizens, etc.
I am 100% straight by the way Also I think that people need to separate things. Somehow gay marriage leads to a slippery slope of legailizing people marrying there dogs and polgamy. People put things liek beastiality with gay marriage because they want people to think like them and put those two in the same category. It is a very subliminal way of making people think that Gays and people that get married to dogs are equals. It is a tricky yet smart way of getting people to think like they do
You know that the majority of men that are polygamists take underage girls as wives or as young as they can get them. There is not a polygamist 40 year old guy getting married to 30-40-50 year old women....and if there is there are few of these men out there.
Second I think it is an assumption that people that are for Gay marriage are against Pologamy because the two things are totally unrelated. So saying that people are or are against Pologamy but for gay marriage is a very hypothetical idea.
Legal polygamy is fine. So long as you keep enforcing age of consent laws and such, there is nothing wrong with it. If someone wants to marry 10 women, and those 10 women have no problem with that, who are we to say otherwise?
Yo Wogsland. First of all I salute you for your youtube hobby b/c you are damn good at it. You are, however, a troll. Whether you realize it or not, you are a troll. I am not even saying trolling is bad, but if you look up the definition of trolling, a lot of your video post fits the profile of a troll poster. A person who stirs up shit, not for the sake of an educated debate, but just for the sake of stirring up shit. I mean, it is fun to sit back and watch b/c I used to do it too........
who cares about `marriage`. If you forget that word then there is no debate whatsoever. All that really matters is can you back your `love` up with actions!? If you can, then your love is very valid. If you are an inconsiderate bastard that leaves your partner(no matter what sex) in a shitty situation then your love is not really love at all. All that matters is love, and who cares about words like `marriage` which have so many connotations.
The slippery slope logic is the most bullshit logic out there, you should know this if your occupation is "physics." Not unless your occupation is to prove physics doesn't exist.
Anyways...polygamy is an established part of many religions, Islamic as well as the Mormons, even though it is illegal in the US. It is not considered to be because of....guess what? Separation of Church and State...the gays need to start a religion, at least it would be based on unconditional love and acceptance.
Also......you need to take off the shirt you are wearing.
If you actually are a fan of the movies, you would know they are based off of Joseph Campbell and how our society is lacking myths and legends. A key part of any society, which the US does not have.
Yes, I am not counting the myths and legends of the Christian faith which has morphed into the most schizophrenic point of view the world has ever seen.
Hopefully Obama can clean up a small portion of the mess this thinking created.
A hypothetical: You belong to a group with strong beliefs. A code of conduct of absolutes, my way or the highway point of view. Every dollar you make a percentage must go to the organization. The leaders do not have to pay the government on the collection of these fund and everyone who is a member must pay. Any opposition to the leadership results in a drastic consequence.
Actually two groups follow the above policy, one is the Mafia.
The Mormon Church funded Prop 8 to overturn what a court stated was unconstitutional. Once again there is this small thing called separation of church and state.
The US government states it will not get involved in any religious groups beliefs, non-illegal ones, and the church can not tell who its members should vote for. Someone is keeping up their end of the bargain, the federal government, yet the Mormons are not. They are funding an issue on moral grounds and not for religious reasons.
I (a straight male) am dating 2 bi-sexual women in a 3-way relationship. We are very happy.
When most people think of polygamy they think of 2 straight women married to one man. That's kind of weird and awkward in my opinion.
When the 2 women are bi-sexual and are dating each other and the man... Then it's great. The women get to enjoy both women and men... and the man gets to enjoy two women.
Just fyi: We are all secular (non-religious).
When ppl ask: I say I am in a "triple" (couple + 1).
what!? how r they even comparable? just shut the fuck up. it is just 2 guys. marriage can just be "two people." you can define marriage however you want, just depending on how u were brought up.
sigh.. as if it's not a big jump to go from two people of different sex marrying, to two of the same sex, to three. There's clearly a logical gap there that you refuse to see. The obvious difference is that any two people can have a nurturing, loving, equal relationship. All evidence points to a trio or more creating a power hierarchy, in which the members are no longer equal. Threesomes inevitably destroy the intimacy and don't last. it's pretty clear that you're a just another bigot. Goodluck
What would happen is that one guy with good health insurance would end up marrying 47 AIDS patients. Then all the other AIDS patients in the world would find out, and they would all marry that guy as well. The AIDS patients would all pay the guy and he would soon become the richest person in the world. Then everyone else's premiums would go up so high, that they would all have to marry this guy just to get insurance.
I am not gay, my girlfriend is bi, so I can give you somewhat of a gay point of view. Also I am the owner of a PolyNetworking site, I am learning about Polygamy, Polyandry, Polygyny, Polyamory, Polyfidelity, Polyfaithful & Polymonogamy.
We personally are Polyfaithful. I have been in Polyamorous relationships that were more like Polygamy & I will agree that there is always a primary in all Poly relationship. Poly is not for everyone, if you can make it work, then it great! If not, that's OK...
marriage between more than two people (whether they're the same sex or not) always implies a power structure, where someone is inevitably left out being a less-than-equal spouse.
so how would the law deal with that aspect of polygamous relationships when it came to rights/benefits/responsibilities?
it could be demonstrated that because of its lack of practicality, it's actually detrimental to the state's interest for it to be recognized as legal.
There'll be arguments that they should get similar rights to married couples. They can visit in the hospitals and whatnot. If they divorce, things might get hairy. Also, is it likely that people would take advantage of this to get benefits? Pretending to be in love group-wise. I think it would be difficult to discern if it's a legitimate relationship since we don't know much how a good polygamistic relationship would look like (or even if there is a "proper" one).
I agree with you. Polygamy is probably seen as evil by a lot of people who support gay marriage. But of course, public opinion doesn't dictate what's right. I'd say the same for this situation. If a group of people want to get together in marriage, they should be able to. The emotional aspects of comminting to mulptiple people are probably going to be tolling, but if they want to, let them. A question that comes to mind, however, is the legal side of this.
(Continued from comment below) And I think that "favorites" would cause jealousy issues. Polygamy has traditionally been a man having multiple wives, and I don't think the multiple wives would consent to a marriage with the other women.
I can kind of see where he's going... I'm gay, so all for gay marriage, and I know that until recently marriage was widely seen as between only a man and a woman, but is more and more often being seen as a union between two people that love each other, since gay people can love too. I guess, if, three people wanted to be committed to each other, why shouldn't they be able to? But also, in a "love triangle," I don't think that one person would love the other two equally, s/he would love one more.
ALL of the patriarchs in the Old Testament were polygamists; marriage is a social contract that allows for stable relationships that are the basis of a society at a given time. That could be MW, MM, WW or M*W*. Jesus didn't spend his earthly ministry talking about marriage, because in Heaven, as he said, it doesn't exist. Most Americans over 40 have been married several times and have kids by several partners that defacto polygamy - they are just not doing it all at once.
I personaly don't get why this even hafto be a debate. Its a personal life choice.
Not allowing these things is like gay marrige or polygami is like saying that you are not allowed to wear red hats. its silly, what you want to wear or who you want to marry is your choice. but i guess theres a line that can be crossed. like nudeists. maybe some people dont want to 100 ding-dongs on the street on their ways to work. fine. but polygami can't affect someone that directly... or can it?
sa long is it is concenting adults if its 2 men or 2 women or if its 1 man 6 women or 1 woman with 6 men as long as they are all concenting ADULTS. if thats what makes you happy and you are an adult go for it.
I don't think the gay marriage debate is exactly over though...How is it over when it's not legal in the majority of the United States. Can't count California anymore. Gay couples can't even adopt in certain states. I really don't care if three adults of the same or different sex want to get married. But I'm not even thinking about that debate yet when gay marriage hasn't been resolved.
Seconding everything Panamaschild said. Also, we have more and more science at our fingertips that suggests homosexuality isn't a choice, there are biological differences in pheromone studies, etc. As we have no science indicating people are born polygamous or polyamorous, it seems like a totally different issue. Also, polygamy highly is controversial within the LDS church and supported only by a small minority of them, so the "Mormons loooove polygamy" thing is a common misconception.
Actually there is a genetic predisposition toward monogamy or polygamy among men. See for example the work of Walum et al on allele 334. Another reason I believe these issues should be logically grouped together.
There are all kinds of marriages to debate. What about a gay man who wants to marry two or more husbands. A Lesbian that wants two or more wives. Or bi sexual polygamy. There may be people in love with themselves who want to marry their clone. Or perhaps they will want to marry many of their clones. Someone may want to marry other people's clones. Who has the final say on that? You or Your clone?
Or Government would finally decide to let people marry however they want. Child custody would be similar, as well as division of property, Because people adopt children whether they are married or not, we must consider the children thing a whole different topic. If within someone's marriage they are causing a crime other than being married then the government can step in the way it would with any other marriage.
They would still have to create a whole new set of laws dealing with these issues, which would take decades to pass. The same isn't true for same sex marriage.
If a man has many wives, is his job required to give them all insurance benefits? If he wants to be divorced from all of them, does he have to give ALL of them alimony? These are just a few of hundreds of laws that would have to be changed in order for polygamy to work.
They may need to make a few new laws, but since groups of people were polygamists before it was illegal we have a guideline. If we need to know what to do in a polygamist situation we can see what they did back then and see if it works legally for today.
Not just a few... hundreds. And you would have to figure out a precedent for different types of plural marriages. Many of these issues also existed before polygamy became illegal.
I'm gay and I really don't see a problem with polygamy.
Love is love. If three people are all in love or one person is in love with two different people and everyone is consenting why does it matter to anyone else?
With a world so full of hate, why does anyone want to stop the spread of love?
Ok I support any marriage as long as both parties consent and are of legal age. This includes homosexual and polygamic. There is no real logical argument against these.
As far as bestiality and pedophilila are concerned they will never be legalized in my mind. Animals cannot concent to anygthing and dont have a legal standing like people. Pedophilic marriaged could not happen because until a child is 18 (16 in some states) they are considered a minor and unable to concent to a marriage.
Why are those claiming to be ultra-religious almost alway unbearably stuffy and hateful tyrants? If these hate mongers are "from God", then it's one more reason to shun such superstitious bullshit.
Live and let live. I guess Christians are clueless about that.
@wogsland IMO, you've oversimplified polygamy by only looking at the semitic model. It is possible for one person to have two different partners in two different locations, for one woman to have a harem of men, or for a hippie communal "free love" arrangement.
As long as all parties are of the age of consent and knowingly consent to the situation, who cares? Again, its a "mind your own business" situation.
In marriage, what are your thoughts on 3rd, 2nd, or 1st cousins ... or siblings?
HaroldRehling 1 week ago
what about a debate on bestiality??? ;)
terceldude 1 month ago
@terceldude If you mean interspecies marriage it is impossible to know whether the other species enters into the marriage contract with full consent.
If you mean the sex act, then because it is impossible for other species to communicate with humans it is impossible for them to petition for rights. Therefor, a human practicing bestiality is not violating anybody's rights and is committing no crime..
HaroldRehling 1 week ago
@HaroldRehling interesting! ;)
terceldude 1 week ago
Very good point my friend.
Multiculturalisme comes to mind.
They starting to ask to celebrate muslim holidays too.
In that case on what basis are you gonna refuse every other religion?
Polygamy should be legal too otherwise you are not politically correct.
But wait islam forbids homosexuality?
So which is it baby?
There is no way on earth that multiculturalism will work.
Ducky888888 5 months ago
I got TYT Now to discuss polygamy! my views on it they did a good job in suming up
KangaKucha 7 months ago
...YES...YES...but two mothers in law sounds scarry....and why do you have a problem with the mormons?....i bet that you don´t dare to have a problem with africans....so you play it safe....and have a problem with mormons....but if two men can marry...then seven men should be abel to marry too....
wanabee100 7 months ago
...YES...YES...but two mothers in law sounds scarry....and why do you have a problem with the mormons?....i bet that you don´t dare to have a problem with africans....so you play it safe....and have a problem with mormons....but if two men can marry...then seven men should be abel to marry too....
wanabee100 7 months ago
polygamy is tottally wrong.
Lynnmist 8 months ago
@Lynnmist why are some lifestyles the Bible condones legal and the others not?! It's unfair, it's prejudiced, it's not right morally, and other stuff...
terceldude 1 month ago
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS SHARIA LAW.
WickedLeaker 9 months ago
I am gay and I think polygamy should be legal between consenting adults. I believe in free choice. Why limit someone else's potential for happiness when it doesn't affect you?
findhornbaby 10 months ago
Just what western men need,5 or 6 more she-male,femi-nazi wives,cha-chink>BOOM!
USAdude30 10 months ago
CTR,
correction...I meant from other YOUTUBE vids that you've posted to, not threads***
PolyPride3 10 months ago
CTR,
Your statements are belittling and unreasonable. From other threads you've mentioned that monogamy marriages are traditional marriages and changing that would lead to ruin of family, etc. If you read history you would see that polygamy has also been part of marriage and in fact America CHANGED the standards of marriage to be MONOGAMY. So if not changing marriage is what you call healthy marriage for the U.S., then America has already failed that by YOUR standards.
PolyPride3 10 months ago
soon u will b able 2 marry ur fridge or washing machine, & then ur dog or cat, u could even marry an Ant, ( (not Aunt) well not yet anyway,) & when the ant dies u can have all the inheratance left 2 ur estate, so then the age limit will b lowered &u can marry children no matter how old; used to be known as paedophilia but times are a changin (bit by bit). I prefer to just stick to the traditional Marriage myself... At least I know thats how I got here.
CTR831 11 months ago
@CTR831
People that marries ants are gonna get loaded!!!
Petfal 10 months ago
I don't think it is more double standards to be pro same sex marriages and not pro polygamy, or the other way around. It IS different things. Well, to be honest, I think it is a little double standards, but not more so than having heteromonogamous marriages, but not any of the other types. Either all marry, or none! It is absurd to have normal marriage, and not allow gays to marry. Genders are irrelevant. Not allowing polygamy... I understand that thought, but it is very uncool.
Petfal 11 months ago
@Petfal
Not allowing gays to marry, though, that is just absurd.
Gay marriage is the exact same thing, in every relevant way. Two people (we cannot set boundaries for genders and skin color and such things) that want to become one.
Polygamy is indirectly the same thing, two people wanting to become one... then another person wanting to become one with that entity :D But it is also something new and good. It removes the absurd notion that love is bad or wrong or immoral.
Petfal 11 months ago
@Petfal
Love never is, not even if you have it for more than one person at the same time (we're talking about sexual romantic love here). Polygyny (one man, several women), of course is a bit stupid, worse than monogamy, since it both set boundaries for love (one man... I call it "monoandry" :D ), and it is also unfair and unjust, in that women are denied the same right. Marriage mostly starts with polygyny, but has to go through monogamy in order to get to good, gender neutral polygamy.
Petfal 11 months ago
@Petfal
In monogamy, equality is learned. The last part of that phase is to allow same sex marriages. When that is done, we are set for evolution to the next level. Polygamy is the best, because you can do what you want, and there is no better thing to want than real, true love.
Petfal 11 months ago
I support polygamy between consenting adults.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 11 months ago
cont'd
However, difficult legislation should not mean poly is WRONG or that you don't tackle the issue and figure it out, esp. when there's LOVE and consenting adults involved that you're dictating what relationship they can be in (freedom of happiness?? why not for all consenting adults and no harm involved?).
PolyPride3 11 months ago
Darkrunner,
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for?
PolyPride3 11 months ago
Darkrunner,
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for? Difficult legislation should not equal WRONG
PolyPride3 11 months ago
Darkrunner,
When it comes to the logic behind if polygamy is right or wrong in a moral sense, you are correct because much of the same arguments that those used for gay marriage advocates can be used for polygamy. Consensual adults, etc. When it comes to the legality that would be a harder case but only because it would be HARDER to figure out and write legislation or laws for working out polygamy. But isn't that what legislators get paid for? Difficult legislation should not equal WRONG
PolyPride3 11 months ago
Travel around the world with an Latino women **rockmycity.info**
AshleyMasonuczrq 1 year ago
I love this argument. Because the homosexual brigade go out there with their rainbow flags screaming "Who are YOU to judge us?"
Following your logic, who are YOU to judge a man in UTAH for having 36 wives?
I don't espouse either life style. But I love the double standard, that is not defendable and never will be.
Darkrunner1975 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Think about your marriage and get a trusted women **rockmycity.info**
ftgyhtdryfgyrtytr 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
naneedj.infoLots of love to give to the right person
surangiable 1 year ago
Polygamy is OK because it is supported in the Holy Bible. It is clearly within the definition of traditional Judeo-Christian marriage. This is what God says, so if you disagree, you are wrong.
202rickh 1 year ago
@202rickh
Depends how you interpret it, perhaps, but I agree that polygamy is ok, and I agree that the Bible says it is ok, but I don't agree that the first is because of the latter. Polygamy is ok because it is a good thing. Perhaps that is why the Bible says it is ok, too, but if a thing is bad, it's not ok, simply because the Bible says so. Luther, who designed our protestantic christianity, also agreed to the Bible not saying polygamy was wrong, and saw itself obliged to marry three people.
Petfal 11 months ago
You're right. I can think of no principled reason to say "two guys can marry but 3 or 7 guys can't form a 7 way marriage". and then if there can be same sex plural marriage then why can't straight people have plural marriages? This does NOT open the door to humans marrying animals or toasters or coffee tables because animals and toasters cannot give provable consent to marriage.
bearnurse1 1 year ago
How about "polygagay" marriage. Multiple gay marriage. Or Polygasex marriage.
multiple gay+straight marriage like a guy + 2 girl normal marriage plus the girls are
gay sometimes marriage. Don't bring in animals..I'm not going there..
barrytubes 1 year ago
@barrytubes all sex aside. I would have no interest in being in a um legal relationship with so many people so I cant speak on why someone else would. I see marriage as sharing assets and property rights and creating a single life together. Any two people is a partnership. 50/50. The more people involved makes your wonder who's life is benefitting and who's isnt. thus polygamy in itself doesnt appear equal in itself because it can't divided as such. At least ONE gets the upper hand
fratbrotha 1 year ago
@fratbrotha how about 20/20/20/20/20, isn't it equal?
Zxuma 1 year ago
@Zxuma thats fine and dandy if you only want to take 20% of your check home from work... goooo for it. Perhaps Marriage in general is just outdated.
fratbrotha 1 year ago
Polygamy, in contrast to gay marriage, leads to demonstrable harm. It can't be separated from exploitation of women and expulsion of large numbers of teen boys from the polygamist community. That’s the reason society and its government are justified in prohibiting polygamy, even in a fully democratic nation. It’s impossible to educate people not to be gay, but we can educate or enculturate them not to become polygamists, or even want to.
stan0970 1 year ago
@stan0970 that's what polyandry is for
y100269 1 year ago
@stan0970
Polygamy has nothing to do with exploitation of women. I believe you are really thinking of polygyny (plural wives), not polygamy (plural marriage... that doesn't even have to include any women). I believe you can practice polygyny in a sound way, respecting and loving the women, but the very nature of it, giving some rights to the one gender, and denying them to the other gender, on no merits of their own, is systematic exploitation. PolyGAMY, however, is a good thing.
Petfal 11 months ago
Law and morality are different points entirely... I (21 year old heterosexual male) am infavour of homosexual marriages and to the same extent poligamist marriages. So long as certain criteria are enforced. One that they are all legally responcible (18-21+) and that everyone is consenting to that type of relationship...
Although personally I would find it hard to live in a poligamous relationship. (I get jelous easily) I feel that is by no means a reason to discriminate against others...
nikmindage 1 year ago
The Church is where people get married!
The Government should not be able to marry - only give out civil unions!
If a church wants to let gays marry - its up to them!
Polygamy would be fine if it wasnt then brainwashed onto the children
It would be one thing to have to wives - but y do they then have to where the funny clothes ..etc...
martind586 1 year ago
@martind586
The church is one place where people can get married. There are others. Marriage under different authorities give different rights. The church decides if it is to let gays, or polygamists get married... but it SHOULD let them, that is the only right decision. BUT: There should always be a church alternative that allows this, in accordance with human rights. That is why it is good to have a state religion, such as we have in Norway (even though they don't do it here yet :D )
Petfal 11 months ago
@martind586
Monogamy is not ok, because it teaches us not only that setting boundaries for love is ok, but even that this is the only acceptable way, and our culture is potent in brainwashing us, too, through hollywood movies, books, peoples opinions, and stuff.
There are some types of religious nuts' polyGYNY that is like what you describe, but be more precise than just say that polygamy is like that.
Petfal 11 months ago
i oppose gay marriage because of the smell coming from my gay neighbors house.
50 years ago gayness was abhorred, being sick and weird like loving 10 yo girls.
well i have to go now and tend to my sheep...
neoeyes4u 1 year ago
From its inception, marriage was about a person’s right to convey their property, inheritance and benefits to another person. Until women obtained equality, love was rarely a factor in marriage. They were arranged. Women had no say. The only thing 2 people cannot do without being married is automatically convey their property, inheritance and benefits to another person not related by blood. The issue then of whom a person should marry is not about sex nor about love. The issue is about trust.
FSUJoker 1 year ago
Youre attempting to create a moral discussion when homosexuals are debated a legal one. Homosexual and have been and will continue to have relationships and commit to those relationships as well as have families. The reason for making it legal is to protect them legally when it comes to longterm benefits, taxes, children and assets etc. Polygamy wouldnt be so much a marriage as it would be a conglomerate. In cases of divorce, or other legal matters it could be messy.
fratbrotha 1 year ago
@fratbrotha Relationships are always messy. That doesn't mean some of them should be illegal.
wogsland 1 year ago
@wogsland
But others should. The government doesn't need to make up a bunch of new laws dealing with this stuff. Plus it would be taken advantage of and people would marry others simply for the benefits. While this happens today, it's more of a hit-or-miss situation.
Plus think of the children when it comes to divorce. Having to live in 3+ different households isn't good.
@Treemeadow
Christians may want to ban polygamy, but their God sure doesn't care.
Mectrixctic 9 months ago
@Mectrixctic
Eventhough some would be in polygamy just for marital tax benefits, but I still don't see it right to restrict and punish those who be in polygamy for love just for the actions of a few. The government can put a cap on how much benefits a couple can get if they have reasonable suspicion that a couple is just marrying for benefits like if there's lots of spouses involved and NO children, etc.
PolyPride3 8 months ago
@Mectrixctic
cont'd from my last statement..
Or better yet, the government doesn't have to guarantee anyone any of these benefits and perhaps they should stay out of marriage completely, at least when it comes to 'benefits'.
PolyPride3 8 months ago
@PolyPride3
Only with polygamous marriages then, since marriage already has benefits.
I think polygamy should be legal if a church santions it, but they get no real rights, especially with children.
Mectrixctic 8 months ago
@fratbrotha
How about "polygagay" marriage. Multiple gay marriage. Or Polygasex marriage.
multiple gay+straight marriage like a guy + 2 girl normal marriage plus the girls are
gay sometimes marriage. Don't bring in animals..I'm not going there
barrytubes 1 year ago
@fratbrotha
I'd agree with you if I saw a rational reason for making a relationship between CONSENTING ADULTS a 'criminal' or 'illegal'. I also fail to see why wouldn't those in poly relationships (which historically is a form of marriage right along side polygamy) can not fight to also have their relationships legally recognized and also given benefits, tax breaks, etc. Sure legislation may be difficult but so was drafting the Constitution, doesn't mean u ignore it rather than figure it out.
PolyPride3 10 months ago
agricolae,
You're right to a degree depending on where we're talking about was influenced. The Romans had some influence on the Christian practices but after the Roman Empire died out, it was just the Christian Church for the large part that influenced Western Civilization. That can be seen in part in the US which if we're honest is still why we don't have gay marriage and polygamy. Homosexual acts were not banned in the Roman Empire btw, many of the Emperors had male child sex slaves.
PolyPride3 1 year ago
interesting topic this is
But, after gay marraige, and polygomy...what next Peadophilia (they could say it's genetic too), goat love, a polygimist gay marriage between an adult man, and a yearling goat, and a blowfly?
Serious question
agricolae101 1 year ago
I am not saying this because of my faith, because I am not religious. I am saying this on a moral stand point. I believe that it is morally wrong to allow polygamy because once you start saying it's ok for more than 2 people to be married to each other at once, than you start making room for it to be alright for someone to abandon one for the other. Or the other or the other....
Marriage to me is not many coming to please 1. Marriage is 2 working together to create a loving home.
GojyotheFeared 1 year ago
It is because of this kind of scenario that polygamy is banned in a number of countries. To prevent destruction of peoples lives on a massive scale.
GojyotheFeared 1 year ago
Here's why polygamy is not ok.
Say you have 5 people that end up getting married. 1 man and 4 women and the guy has a few kids with each woman. Say that 2 of the women decided they don't want to be married to the guy anymore for whatever reason and want to find someone else. How do you divide up the assets without screwing over everyone? The 2 women win, the guy must spend double in child supportand what not and then he goes broke and can't support his other 2 wives.
GojyotheFeared 1 year ago
Sorry- those (RLDS) are not real Mormons-dont confuse the two. LDS members don't allow polygamy ( I dont even know how to spell it) Anyway I think you are right about that being the next step. The world has gone crazy!
mormonwoman52 1 year ago
2manysecrets,
Not all monogamous relationships are loving. Some couples mention that the love tends to lessen or die out eventually. I believe you can have true love in both monogamy and polygamous relationships but in polygamy it's just a matter of how much time the man offers to share the love with each wife.
PolyPride3 1 year ago
Polygamy, polyandry, plural marriage or whatever...I think it's fine, as long as like you said, no marriage of children to adults like those sick sex cults do. The human reproductive system is not geared for total monogamy, both males and females seek variety. Not to be gross or anything, but I know I could never restrict myself to only one mate.
CanadiaNecro1 1 year ago
The gov't should choose who you love even if it's 4 ppl or 1 person. You have the right to love any one or as many ppl you want. The gov't should be able to tell you who to love.
Downy1100 1 year ago
Hmm, let's see...this video was done on 5/21/08, and since then, Proposition 8 has passed (by the voters...who don't agree with you...and are the majority) and the California Supreme court has upheld it...
Let's see now...is the gay "marriage" debate over NOW? LMAO
Tell me more about this (prop 8) trend continuing across the country... LMAO
I love that arrogant little smile at 3:17...such ignorant confidence...
Hey, uh... IN YOUR FACE. :)
randommagnum 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 This is for you to think on. Sodomy is, by definition, any sexual intercourse held to be abnormal. In AL (where I reside), sodomy is defined as any unnatural sex act and is illegal. Also, this law applies to oral sex. This is probably similar in most states. Imagine how much whining and belly-aching the self professed righteous would be doing if they were jailed and dragged into court over a blow job.
Maybe the goings on in your bedroom should be under public scrutiny!
jsinkas 1 year ago
Marriage should only have three rules1. legal age of consent, human and mental able to sign a contract......number of people, race, or sex should not be an issue.
TheMhunky 1 year ago
Jesus said sodomy is an abomination. Sodomy is nothing short of sado-maschism. Sex involving poop is mental illness. Work in an ER for awhile & see what comes in, sodomites shoving everything but the kitchen sink up their rectum. The AMA called homosexuality a "mania before the "gay" lobby forced political correctness. 90% of homosexual men have had sex with boys 12 or under. Sodomites die on average by 42.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
Why not three, four, or however many people? I don't understand how 1 guy is shared by 2 girls, and i wouldn't share my girlfriend with another man, but their might be many practical applications for multiple partners. Say you have a household of 3 people all married. 2 have busy jobs and one takes care of the house and children, of their own free will. Its not a lifestyle that I can understand or would choose to have, but I'm an astronomer and not a TV journalist for those same reasons.
iruleyou 1 year ago
I am a married heterosexual male and have no problem with either gay marriage or polygamy. Frankly I don't know how polygamists do it, one woman is enough headache for me.LOL
yobo1016 1 year ago
Check on an college campus. You'll find a GLBT group that says "Gay" and "Straight" aren't the only two sexual orientations. Gay marriage opens a new door to marriage among other sexual orientations as well. In fact, the GLBT acronym doesn't even cover them all--just most of the adult/human ones. So---now we're back to legal vs. illegal sexual orientations. Do you think those guys from NAMBLA will start sending lobbyists and ACLU lawyers to Washington?
bluuterra 1 year ago
Both polygamy and gay marriage can involve marital relationships involving 2 or more consenting adults. I'm not aware of any harm that is directly a result of polygamy or homosexuality other than it being a matter depending on who or how it's practiced. I just disagree with same-sex marriage primarily based on religious belief but that's another story.
PolyPride3 2 years ago
@chermonaraine
You're being unreasonable. People should not see polygamy as being bizarre because it has been practiced since antiquity, even way back in biblical times. It's only a new consideration to us or seems that way to American culture because our culture is not used to it. I'm a Christian so my moral standards don't really allow for me to accept gay marriage is okay, but I know at least that since it is legal in some states, then I also don't see why hold back on polygamy.
PolyPride3 2 years ago
Well, lets not stop there, why not have animal marriage or marriage to a rock or carrot or heres one for ya! ....marriage to an alien......
chermonaraine 2 years ago
I'm LDS, let me start by saying I'm glad our church banned polygamy back in the 1800's, I wish they would have done so sooner, but whatever. As to gay marriage, I couldn't care less what two consenting adults want to do with each other, it doesn't effect me and I'd be pissed if someone was telling me what I can and can't do behind closed doors. So yes, I guess if I'm ok with gay marriage being legal then I'm ok with polygamy being legal. Neither are for me but neither effect me.
ryan97035 2 years ago
Listen, I hate to break this to you but marriage has already been redefined in 5 states. Therefore the old definition of marriage being between a man and a woman in those 5 states is totally invalid.
Knowing this it will be mandatory that the definition of marriage take on its new meaning
in reference books such as the dictionary. Publishers have no choice to rewrite in the new definition or they can be faced with legal charges of discrimination.
moonflowerwaltz 2 years ago
I'm a gay man in an 8+ year monogamous relationship. If we fall in love with another person, I see no reason to stop that from happening. Love is love. There's enough love for everyone. The hardest part would probably be deciding what's for dinner with all of the opinions.
Polygamy is perfectly moral. Consenting adults have the right to live their life as they want.
AcrobatHero 2 years ago
I will let you know one thing, mormons are NOT poligymists... that is a high myth about the mormons they are not allowed to have 7 wifes so please stop talking BS about Mormons. Poligamy is ok in a sense I mean look at Roseanne & Tom Arnold they had a threeway coupling. But I say to each their own and the government shouldnt have any say over who can marry who. Now if a guy wants to marry a guy that should be their business and they happen to want to include their "cabana boy" then Oh Well.
babs1983 2 years ago
i know a few Mormons, and yes Mormons CAN be polygamists AS LONG as the can support each husband/wife.
exileghost 2 years ago
A better solution would be to get the federal government OUT of the business of marriage all together. That way, if no one is hurting anyone else's rights, then so be it. Polygamous unions are married in the sense that they consider themselves to be such, but the government just doesn't recognize it. If the government simply got out of the marriage business, then the whole gay marriage thing and the polygamous marriage thing would all just go away.
jmelkis 2 years ago 2
People should live how they want to. As long as that choice doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights its all good.
joeyramone9 2 years ago 7
@joeyramone9 How about a child's right to have two normal parents?
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 I wouldn't say that a gay couple is "abnormal." It is just not the norm by your standards. We don't choose who are parents are. I was born into a very poor family, but I don't complain about my right to have two wealthy parents. When my parents got divorced I didn't argue my right to have the typical "nuclear family." We make the best of the situations we are dealt. I see no disadvantage to having "abnormal" parents. If anything it makes you stronger.
joeyramone9 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 You are wrong. Sodomy is abnormal. Sodomy is sadistic & masochistic. Sex involving poop=excrement, golden showers & fisting is a filthy PERVERSION. Your butt hole was meant to excrete poop and that is all. No tongue, no penis no foreign objects, get it? Now if you can't understand that then I think you're equally as mentally sick.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 How is it that a child being brought up without a mother but instead two men who sodomize each other going to make a child "stronger?" You sound like a real nutjob.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 I just checked out your channel. You're a little 19 yr old sexual pervert yourself, arent you?
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 About the sodomy, its not for me, but if other people want to do it why should anyone want to stop them? If you think it is a "perversion" that is your opinion. No need to force it on others. Your debate on the child being stronger is irrelevant. Strait parents also have anal sex. Its bedroom stuff. That doesn't have any factor on a child's upbringing. The one thing you do have right is that I am 19, although not a pervert. That would be a judgment, which is a biblical sin. bravo!
joeyramone9 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 I visited your site, and I stand by my statement, you're a teenage pervert and at the rate you're going you'll probably grow up to be an adult pervert. BTW, you're a pottymouth. Grow up.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 To "judge" in the Greek NT means to "pass judgement on & to then sentence, to have the ability to execute that judgement," which would be hell and I have no power to cast someone into hell, so I was not "judging" you. I love how atheists quote the Bible. What a little wimp you are.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 I love how Christians shove their religion on everyone because they think it is right. You can use whatever definition you want to make yourself feel better about your own faith, but I can think for myself. I don't need a book to tell me how to live or how to think. I have my own morals and those don't involve chastising others for how they choose to live. If you want to be christian thats fine, but stop trying to convert the world. Its annoying.
joeyramone9 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mkmason2002 This is for you to think on. Sodomy is, by definition, any sexual intercourse held to be abnormal. In AL (where I reside), sodomy is defined as any unnatural sex act and is illegal. Also, this law applies to oral sex. This is probably similar in most states. Imagine how much whining and belly-aching the self professed righteous would be doing if they were jailed and dragged into court over a blow job.
Maybe the goings on in your bedroom should be under public scrutiny!
jsinkas 1 year ago
@joeyramone9 What about a child's right to 2 normal parents & not be laughed at in school for having queers as parents? Sodomy causes AIDS, & that has affected us all. AIDS originated from homosexual sodomy period. How many millions have now died from their blood transfusions? The hate crime leg. will put me in jail for disagreeing with their filthy lifestyle.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 Alright, since you didn't understand me the first time I'll try to dumb myself down for you. If it wasn't for ignorant fucks such as yourself, kids would not be laughed at in school for having homosexual parents. Sodomy does not cause AIDS. It can be transferred that way. AIDS started from monkeys. If you donate blood, first they don't let you if you practice sodomy, second they test the blood so no AIDS. As for the hate crimes legislation, don't be a drama queen. You're safe.
joeyramone9 1 year ago
Polygamy is only possible when one gender is repressed enough to accept it. Gay marriage has nothing to do with it. If you want multiple partners don't get married, or if you want polygamy then you are free to travel somewhere else. But if you say things that contradict the moral code, including that you accept gay marriage, in pro-polygamist parts of the world you will get the chop. Just because we are tolerant enough to accept gays doesn't mean you should disrespect all our other beliefs.
shinytooth23 2 years ago 2
Hey, if more than two people can make it work then more power to them. Id think the odds are not good... hell, the odds are not good with just two, and the potential for chaos has got to rise exponentially with each additional partner...
But that's a reason to avoid it, not a reason to forbid it.
Mystylplx 2 years ago
is this a parody?
maaaaaaaaaartin 2 years ago
I'm against allowing gay marriage. Why? I have many reasons, but my biggest concern is for it leading to worse types of marriages, like polygamy, I mean, if gays want their rights, why cant people have the right to marry their sister of grandmother?
Thats what I'm worried about.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
Because there is no biological reason for people not to marry more than one person, while there is for them to marry their grandmother or sister.
Treemeadow 2 years ago
Marriage is love expressed by two people. Not three or four. It's completely immoral.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago 2
By whose standard of morality?
Whatever happened to the so-called seperation of church and state?
Treemeadow 2 years ago
By standards of a person with good morals.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
How is polygamy bad morals?
Without invoking religious backup, mind. Remember- Church and State are two different things now, and its discrimination to enforce the morals of one religion on everyone.
Polygamy (multiple marriage) is only immoral insofar as it breaks the law. If that law were revoked or changed, polygamy would no longer be immoral.
Morals are a human invention, not long lasting. It isn't so because someone in a pulpit says its so.
Treemeadow 2 years ago
Exactly my point. No one knows what good morals are in these days.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
Whose set of morals is the right set of morals?
The muslims?
The buddhists?
The humanists?
The Christians?
Anti-polygamy is effectively a Christian idea.
So, does this mean that we must all follow the Christian value system? Even in a country supposedly run by the people or State and not church?
If the world is to be truly fair, we must allow for things like gay and polyamorous marriage. The religious seem to believe they OWN marriage.
Treemeadow 2 years ago 4
Well put Treemeadow, well put.
wogsland 2 years ago
Thankyou ^^
Treemeadow 2 years ago
@Treemeadow YOU ASKED, "Whose set of morals is the right set of morals?"
God's.
He wrote 613 commandments.
If you have a problem with it your argument should be with Him.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@mkmason2002 Of course, that's the Christian God... should Hindus be held to that same standard? Atheists? The argument isn't with God because God isn't the one trying to force everyone to do what He said 3,000 years ago... it's His children who are trying to force His commandments on others.
decoy256 1 year ago
@decoy256 There's ONLY ONE God. He said sodomy is a sin. He doesn't care what religion you're into. It doesn't change His laws, His truth. Just because YOU don't believe in His laws doesn't change it's truthfulness. His children are trying to show you that sin is harmful. Sodomites have the highest suicide rate in the world, AIDS, veneral diseases, Korsopi cancer, on and on. Sex involving poop is filthy & sick. Why do they kill themselves? Guilt.
mkmason2002 1 year ago
@Treemeadow : Marriage in the United States and many countries is based on Christianity. I am not anti-gay, nor am i a Christian, etc. however, as it is a Christian institution and the act is a Christian concept, gay marriage actually has no justifiable foundation.
One of the only times i recall ever agreeing with this institution of religion.
I'm a romantic,. It merely tells the world you have chosen that person to be with. Strangely, true love does seem to follow monogamy.
2manysecrets2 1 year ago
@Treemeadow i hope you know that polygamy is a common mormon practice and mormons are a denomination of christianity..... not exactly anti-christian. and there are many people out there that are not christian, even athiest, think that its bad.
bluedog454 1 year ago
@bluedog454 It is NOT a common mormon practice. It has been outlawed by Mormonism for some time. It is, however, a common Fundamentalist Mormon practice.
Mormon's are not technically recognised by the rest of christianity, but at least they try and stay true to their roots.
And I agree, a lot of non-christians think it is bad as well, but the modern-day practice of monogamy sprung from Christianity.
Treemeadow 1 year ago
@Treemeadow yeah but its is no longer just a christian belief. society as a whole now accepts monogamy and doesn't approve of polygamy. majority wins, and that majority includes lots of non-christians.
bluedog454 1 year ago
@Treemeadow Romans only had one wife to one man, The Greeks only had one wife to one man (Macedonians excepted)
Both predate Chritianity
So how did monogamy come from being Christian? (You could easily argue that it spread from the influence of the Roman empire) at least that would explain why, when Russia became Christian they still initially kept polygamy as a common practise...tsar Vladimir who forced his people to become Christian kept 900 wives reportedly...Ivan the Terrible too.
agricolae101 1 year ago
Everyone knows the line between good and bad morals unless you haven't been taught.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
Define them, then. Why -exactly- is polygamy bad, other than that it is "against good morals"?
Who said it?
Treemeadow 2 years ago
It's completely unnatural. You know deep in your heart that there is something wrong with marrying multiple women. It goes against the definition of marriage.
This isn't even worth arguing.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
Whose definition of marriage?
What if that definition were to change?
The definition of gay changed.
Who said multiple women, either. It might be two men marrying one woman, or any combination.
Why is it unnatural? In the wild, animal packs often consist of one Alpha and the rest all mate with him. Nature isn't a good example for your argument.
It IS worth arguing. Just like Civil Rights for African Americans was worth arguing.
I stand on the side of equality. I stand for LOVE
Treemeadow 2 years ago
Considering it wasn't argued over YouTube, yes.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
What does that have to do with anything? Youtube is a new forum of human interaction, and just as valid as any other.
You've run out of stuff to say- actually, you never had any arguments to begin with. You only stated your ideas, but nothing to verify it.
Treemeadow 2 years ago
Actually, I wrote a 5 page essay on why I'm against things like these, so don't jump to assumptions.
Dont believe me? I could care less.
Brandooooooooooo 2 years ago
Anyone can write an essay, doesn't mean they're right.
Furthermore- why haven't you used points from your essay? Intelligence trumps emotion in debate. You have only based your arguments on what you feel, not on facts.
Treemeadow 2 years ago
The central question concerns the purpose of marriage: whay does it accomplish. If any number or type of persons want to cohabit and coo and hold hands, the end of that is, what, happiness? But if the long-term, loftier project of marriage is the rearing of children, then that must be recognized, rewarded, and supported, since children are the future--the workers, taxpayers, fellow citizens, etc.
jacoblandes 2 years ago
I am 100% straight by the way Also I think that people need to separate things. Somehow gay marriage leads to a slippery slope of legailizing people marrying there dogs and polgamy. People put things liek beastiality with gay marriage because they want people to think like them and put those two in the same category. It is a very subliminal way of making people think that Gays and people that get married to dogs are equals. It is a tricky yet smart way of getting people to think like they do
pnutty7 2 years ago
You know that the majority of men that are polygamists take underage girls as wives or as young as they can get them. There is not a polygamist 40 year old guy getting married to 30-40-50 year old women....and if there is there are few of these men out there.
Second I think it is an assumption that people that are for Gay marriage are against Pologamy because the two things are totally unrelated. So saying that people are or are against Pologamy but for gay marriage is a very hypothetical idea.
pnutty7 2 years ago
Legal polygamy is fine. So long as you keep enforcing age of consent laws and such, there is nothing wrong with it. If someone wants to marry 10 women, and those 10 women have no problem with that, who are we to say otherwise?
RobbyTheSheef 2 years ago
Yo Wogsland. First of all I salute you for your youtube hobby b/c you are damn good at it. You are, however, a troll. Whether you realize it or not, you are a troll. I am not even saying trolling is bad, but if you look up the definition of trolling, a lot of your video post fits the profile of a troll poster. A person who stirs up shit, not for the sake of an educated debate, but just for the sake of stirring up shit. I mean, it is fun to sit back and watch b/c I used to do it too........
japanrussell 2 years ago
who cares about `marriage`. If you forget that word then there is no debate whatsoever. All that really matters is can you back your `love` up with actions!? If you can, then your love is very valid. If you are an inconsiderate bastard that leaves your partner(no matter what sex) in a shitty situation then your love is not really love at all. All that matters is love, and who cares about words like `marriage` which have so many connotations.
japanrussell 2 years ago
This man doth protest too much. And you know what that means...
Nobody´s hurting you but you spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about gays. MMMkay.
BTW you forgot the rest of the paranoid hype... that gay marriage is a gateway drug that will lead to people marrying horse and bicycles, etc.
Finally I´ll be able to marry my toaster!!!
oalemdemadrid 2 years ago
Actually I was totally serious. Google Libertarian.
wogsland 2 years ago
hey, dick, who gives a fuck? let us be happy.
RoadsideMuse 2 years ago
The slippery slope logic is the most bullshit logic out there, you should know this if your occupation is "physics." Not unless your occupation is to prove physics doesn't exist.
Anyways...polygamy is an established part of many religions, Islamic as well as the Mormons, even though it is illegal in the US. It is not considered to be because of....guess what? Separation of Church and State...the gays need to start a religion, at least it would be based on unconditional love and acceptance.
ToManifest 2 years ago
Also......you need to take off the shirt you are wearing.
If you actually are a fan of the movies, you would know they are based off of Joseph Campbell and how our society is lacking myths and legends. A key part of any society, which the US does not have.
Yes, I am not counting the myths and legends of the Christian faith which has morphed into the most schizophrenic point of view the world has ever seen.
Hopefully Obama can clean up a small portion of the mess this thinking created.
ToManifest 2 years ago
A hypothetical: You belong to a group with strong beliefs. A code of conduct of absolutes, my way or the highway point of view. Every dollar you make a percentage must go to the organization. The leaders do not have to pay the government on the collection of these fund and everyone who is a member must pay. Any opposition to the leadership results in a drastic consequence.
Actually two groups follow the above policy, one is the Mafia.
The other is the Mormon Church.
It is called tyranny.
ToManifest 2 years ago
The Mormon Church funded Prop 8 to overturn what a court stated was unconstitutional. Once again there is this small thing called separation of church and state.
The US government states it will not get involved in any religious groups beliefs, non-illegal ones, and the church can not tell who its members should vote for. Someone is keeping up their end of the bargain, the federal government, yet the Mormons are not. They are funding an issue on moral grounds and not for religious reasons.
ToManifest 2 years ago
I (a straight male) am dating 2 bi-sexual women in a 3-way relationship. We are very happy.
When most people think of polygamy they think of 2 straight women married to one man. That's kind of weird and awkward in my opinion.
When the 2 women are bi-sexual and are dating each other and the man... Then it's great. The women get to enjoy both women and men... and the man gets to enjoy two women.
Just fyi: We are all secular (non-religious).
When ppl ask: I say I am in a "triple" (couple + 1).
Vindaven 2 years ago 2
damn you hit the jackpot
imartarded 2 years ago
what!? how r they even comparable? just shut the fuck up. it is just 2 guys. marriage can just be "two people." you can define marriage however you want, just depending on how u were brought up.
JJtheJaxartosaurus 2 years ago
sigh.. as if it's not a big jump to go from two people of different sex marrying, to two of the same sex, to three. There's clearly a logical gap there that you refuse to see. The obvious difference is that any two people can have a nurturing, loving, equal relationship. All evidence points to a trio or more creating a power hierarchy, in which the members are no longer equal. Threesomes inevitably destroy the intimacy and don't last. it's pretty clear that you're a just another bigot. Goodluck
bossk621 2 years ago
What would happen is that one guy with good health insurance would end up marrying 47 AIDS patients. Then all the other AIDS patients in the world would find out, and they would all marry that guy as well. The AIDS patients would all pay the guy and he would soon become the richest person in the world. Then everyone else's premiums would go up so high, that they would all have to marry this guy just to get insurance.
clutch1245 2 years ago
lol what guy wud do that?..
truthbetoldify 2 years ago
thus is stupid
TheMdjhe 2 years ago
i married my right hand and we is sellibrating hour 6 yer annivercery.
dulamel305 2 years ago
What about straight marriage? If a guy can marry a girl in California, why can't he marry two?
QaFeRo 2 years ago
I am not gay, my girlfriend is bi, so I can give you somewhat of a gay point of view. Also I am the owner of a PolyNetworking site, I am learning about Polygamy, Polyandry, Polygyny, Polyamory, Polyfidelity, Polyfaithful & Polymonogamy.
We personally are Polyfaithful. I have been in Polyamorous relationships that were more like Polygamy & I will agree that there is always a primary in all Poly relationship. Poly is not for everyone, if you can make it work, then it great! If not, that's OK...
CainOTrump 2 years ago
To many names!
Se7enHxC 2 years ago
under civil law polygamy is recognized in 48 countries-muslim
under customary law it is an additional 15 countries and finally in countries where it ALREADY has "status" - 26 countries INCLUDING the USA.
this was a good video...truth is its already here
they're here, they're near, get used to them
warrentur 2 years ago
marriage between more than two people (whether they're the same sex or not) always implies a power structure, where someone is inevitably left out being a less-than-equal spouse.
so how would the law deal with that aspect of polygamous relationships when it came to rights/benefits/responsibilities?
it could be demonstrated that because of its lack of practicality, it's actually detrimental to the state's interest for it to be recognized as legal.
soquirules 2 years ago
There'll be arguments that they should get similar rights to married couples. They can visit in the hospitals and whatnot. If they divorce, things might get hairy. Also, is it likely that people would take advantage of this to get benefits? Pretending to be in love group-wise. I think it would be difficult to discern if it's a legitimate relationship since we don't know much how a good polygamistic relationship would look like (or even if there is a "proper" one).
senorelquesadero 2 years ago
i'm an atheist, but not gay.
I agree with you. Polygamy is probably seen as evil by a lot of people who support gay marriage. But of course, public opinion doesn't dictate what's right. I'd say the same for this situation. If a group of people want to get together in marriage, they should be able to. The emotional aspects of comminting to mulptiple people are probably going to be tolling, but if they want to, let them. A question that comes to mind, however, is the legal side of this.
senorelquesadero 2 years ago
(Continued from comment below) And I think that "favorites" would cause jealousy issues. Polygamy has traditionally been a man having multiple wives, and I don't think the multiple wives would consent to a marriage with the other women.
flyguy380 2 years ago
I can kind of see where he's going... I'm gay, so all for gay marriage, and I know that until recently marriage was widely seen as between only a man and a woman, but is more and more often being seen as a union between two people that love each other, since gay people can love too. I guess, if, three people wanted to be committed to each other, why shouldn't they be able to? But also, in a "love triangle," I don't think that one person would love the other two equally, s/he would love one more.
flyguy380 2 years ago
ALL of the patriarchs in the Old Testament were polygamists; marriage is a social contract that allows for stable relationships that are the basis of a society at a given time. That could be MW, MM, WW or M*W*. Jesus didn't spend his earthly ministry talking about marriage, because in Heaven, as he said, it doesn't exist. Most Americans over 40 have been married several times and have kids by several partners that defacto polygamy - they are just not doing it all at once.
linuxguru1968 2 years ago
oh and by teh way...
you seem really hugable. sort of like a cozy guy. I want you for president :3
*keep asking the crowd questions!!!
RecycleElf 2 years ago
I personaly don't get why this even hafto be a debate. Its a personal life choice.
Not allowing these things is like gay marrige or polygami is like saying that you are not allowed to wear red hats. its silly, what you want to wear or who you want to marry is your choice. but i guess theres a line that can be crossed. like nudeists. maybe some people dont want to 100 ding-dongs on the street on their ways to work. fine. but polygami can't affect someone that directly... or can it?
RecycleElf 2 years ago
sa long is it is concenting adults if its 2 men or 2 women or if its 1 man 6 women or 1 woman with 6 men as long as they are all concenting ADULTS. if thats what makes you happy and you are an adult go for it.
merishane 2 years ago
I don't think the gay marriage debate is exactly over though...How is it over when it's not legal in the majority of the United States. Can't count California anymore. Gay couples can't even adopt in certain states. I really don't care if three adults of the same or different sex want to get married. But I'm not even thinking about that debate yet when gay marriage hasn't been resolved.
Panamaschild 2 years ago
Seconding everything Panamaschild said. Also, we have more and more science at our fingertips that suggests homosexuality isn't a choice, there are biological differences in pheromone studies, etc. As we have no science indicating people are born polygamous or polyamorous, it seems like a totally different issue. Also, polygamy highly is controversial within the LDS church and supported only by a small minority of them, so the "Mormons loooove polygamy" thing is a common misconception.
Dougkey1101 2 years ago
Actually there is a genetic predisposition toward monogamy or polygamy among men. See for example the work of Walum et al on allele 334. Another reason I believe these issues should be logically grouped together.
wogsland 2 years ago
There are all kinds of marriages to debate. What about a gay man who wants to marry two or more husbands. A Lesbian that wants two or more wives. Or bi sexual polygamy. There may be people in love with themselves who want to marry their clone. Or perhaps they will want to marry many of their clones. Someone may want to marry other people's clones. Who has the final say on that? You or Your clone?
Advice4vice 2 years ago
Polygamy would warrant new laws to decide things like social security benefits, division of property, child custody, etc.
You would not have to do that with same sex marriage.
The two are two entirely different animals.
bearchewtoy75 2 years ago
Or Government would finally decide to let people marry however they want. Child custody would be similar, as well as division of property, Because people adopt children whether they are married or not, we must consider the children thing a whole different topic. If within someone's marriage they are causing a crime other than being married then the government can step in the way it would with any other marriage.
Advice4vice 2 years ago
They would still have to create a whole new set of laws dealing with these issues, which would take decades to pass. The same isn't true for same sex marriage.
If a man has many wives, is his job required to give them all insurance benefits? If he wants to be divorced from all of them, does he have to give ALL of them alimony? These are just a few of hundreds of laws that would have to be changed in order for polygamy to work.
bearchewtoy75 2 years ago
They may need to make a few new laws, but since groups of people were polygamists before it was illegal we have a guideline. If we need to know what to do in a polygamist situation we can see what they did back then and see if it works legally for today.
Advice4vice 2 years ago
Not just a few... hundreds. And you would have to figure out a precedent for different types of plural marriages. Many of these issues also existed before polygamy became illegal.
bearchewtoy75 2 years ago
Can a person marry him/herself???
35thave 2 years ago
I'm gay and I really don't see a problem with polygamy.
Love is love. If three people are all in love or one person is in love with two different people and everyone is consenting why does it matter to anyone else?
With a world so full of hate, why does anyone want to stop the spread of love?
ikisscadavers 2 years ago
Ok I support any marriage as long as both parties consent and are of legal age. This includes homosexual and polygamic. There is no real logical argument against these.
As far as bestiality and pedophilila are concerned they will never be legalized in my mind. Animals cannot concent to anygthing and dont have a legal standing like people. Pedophilic marriaged could not happen because until a child is 18 (16 in some states) they are considered a minor and unable to concent to a marriage.
someUtubeguy 2 years ago
Why are those claiming to be ultra-religious almost alway unbearably stuffy and hateful tyrants? If these hate mongers are "from God", then it's one more reason to shun such superstitious bullshit.
Live and let live. I guess Christians are clueless about that.
polkadotbox2 2 years ago
God is the ultimate tyrant. Fortunately no real ones will ever have that much power.
wogsland 2 years ago
"God is the ultimate tyrant. Fortunately no real ones will ever have that much power."
You mean as much power as the God from the profou