Should polygamy be legalized? (Poll)

[kyzr]

Why do they have to be based on religion to be considered tyranny?

Are you referring to the term "tyranny of the majority"?
Merriam-Webster:
: a situation in which a group of people are treated unfairly because their situation is different from the situation of most of the people in a democratic country

 

[OldFlame]

Are you referring to the term "tyranny of the majority"?
Merriam-Webster:
: a situation in which a group of people are treated unfairly because their situation is different from the situation of most of the people in a democratic country

No, I was responding to Leviticus’s comment in the post I quoted:

If your morals are based on religious belief then enforcing those morals on everyone else Is a form of tyranny.

 

[Couchpotato]

You do understand that copy/replace is not how you change the wording in a law, right? EVERYTHING needs to be amended and then voted on.

Thanks Einstein. If you agree with the current law on the books, why would changing the word marriage to (insert word here meaning the same thing) matter to you. You could actually pass one law changing the word marriage to (chosen word) in all laws. It's really not that hard. Certainly wouldnt take the amount of time we have invested in arguing over it.

And the 2 contracts are for different purposes. They can have the same name and have different purposes. AAMOF, in current society, a marriage is not official without the secular part. You can have the contract from your church, but that is not going to entitle you to any benefits that are contingent on you being married.

But why? What's the payoff of having one word that means 2 different things to the 2 different interests especially when it causes this much disagreement? Literally nothing changes accept the wording and we eliminate 99% of the disagreement. Explain to me how that's not better than what we are currently doing.

 

[AsherN]

Thanks Einstein. If you agree with the current law on the books, why would changing the word marriage to (insert word here meaning the same thing) matter to you. You could actually pass one law changing the word marriage to (chosen word) in all laws. It's really not that hard. Certainly wouldnt take the amount of time we have invested in arguing over it.

You can't. You have to examine the laws to make sure the word is used the way it is intended. And then you pass costs down to businesses to change the wording in rvery document, contract, etc. It is an enormous task that is not worth it to satisfy a small subset of a particular religion.

 

[my2¢]

Polygamy? With non-Hispanic Whites having the lowest birth rates in the U.S. wouldn't this cause the right to crap their pants!

 

[Paleman]

Now that the government approved gay marriages, what's the next taboo we can fix?

Polygamy
Polygamy is the practice of marrying multiple spouses. When a man is married to more than one wife at the same time, sociologists call this polygyny. When a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry. In contrast to polygamy, monogamy is marriage consisting of only two parties.Wikipedia

Polygamy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why not? It is a lot less troublesome for me than man-on-man.

 

[Couchpotato]

You can't. You have to examine the laws to make sure the word is used the way it is intended. And then you pass costs down to businesses to change the wording in rvery document, contract, etc. It is an enormous task that is not worth it to satisfy a small subset of a particular religion.

Marriage as far as the government is concerned has multiple means in the law? That seems rather unlikely and if it did the word would have to be defined within the law. Since I am proposing swapping out one word for another with the same meaning within the law it shouldn't matter. So if we swap marriage for say union then the definition of union inside that particular law would mean the same thing marriage once did for the purposes of that law. We could do this with the passage of a single piece of legislation. It's a 1-2 page bill.

 

[Leviticus]

Marriage is a religious concept. Degeneracy has hidden in the dark throughout the history of man. It should stay in the dark. It should NOT be codified in civil society. And yeah, I equate degenerate behavior with animals. Any other questions?

I would say the concept of marriage came before religion, Since marriage was one of the earliest institutions established and existed well before man became Civilized enough to consider things like religion.

 

[Concerned American]

AAMOF, in current society, a marriage is not official without the secular part.

This is not true. CA has recognized civil unions for at least 70 years as anyone can go to a justice of the peace and create a civil union with no secular connection whatsoever.

 

[Concerned American]

I would say the concept of marriage came before religion, Since marriage was one of the earliest institutions established and existed well before man became Civilized enough to consider things like religion.

I disagree. A union of need or convenience is not a marriage. That is the point of this discussion. The degenerates had civil unions granted in most places in the 90s. Civil unions provided these whack jobs with all of the legal benefits of marriage but they were not happy until they were able to say they were married. Again, marriage is a religious union and degenerate unions are not accepted in traditional religion.

 

[AsherN]

This is not true. CA has recognized civil unions for at least 70 years as anyone can go to a justice of the peace and create a civil union with no secular connection whatsoever.

The secular part is the going to a JP. See if you manage to get a church marriage without any secular marriage and then claim you are married.

 

[AsherN]

Marriage as far as the government is concerned has multiple means in the law? That seems rather unlikely and if it did the word would have to be defined within the law. Since I am proposing swapping out one word for another with the same meaning within the law it shouldn't matter. So if we swap marriage for say union then the definition of union inside that particular law would mean the same thing marriage once did for the purposes of that law. We could do this with the passage of a single piece of legislation. It's a 1-2 page bill.

It's not a 1-2 page bill. Every law needs to be amended. Every statute, contract, etc. The extend in law where the term marriage is used is huge.

 

[initforme]

Polygamy? With non-Hispanic Whites having the lowest birth rates in the U.S. wouldn't this cause the right to crap their pants!

The birth rate is higher than ever.

 

[Concerned American]

The secular part is the going to a JP. See if you manage to get a church marriage without any secular marriage and then claim you are married.

Are you married in the traditional sense? If you are, you would know that you are married by the clergy and they make a report to the state that you are indeed married. The only reason that the state is involved at all is because the participants want the tax and legal advantages that the state provides to married couples and civil unions. A marriage has only three participants--a man, a woman and God.

 

[FA_Q2]

As does mine. Thanks.

But you failed to address the point I made.

You say someone should change the term they use. Why not you?

 

[Couchpotato]

But you failed to address the point I made.

You say someone should change the term they use. Why not you?

I'm not saying one should change over the other numb nuts. Only that we shouldn't use the same word for both definitions. But if you want a reason one should change vs the other. The Government shouldn't care, and if all you want is a secular union then why would you care either?

 

[Couchpotato]

It's not a 1-2 page bill. Every law needs to be amended. Every statute, contract, etc. The extend in law where the term marriage is used is huge.

No they dont dummy. The legislature can write a bill changing all the other laws wording from marriage to whatever term is chosen.

 

[Toro]

Now that the government approved gay marriages, what's the next taboo we can fix?

Polygamy
Polygamy is the practice of marrying multiple spouses. When a man is married to more than one wife at the same time, sociologists call this polygyny. When a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry. In contrast to polygamy, monogamy is marriage consisting of only two parties.Wikipedia

Polygamy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sure. Why not.

 

[kyzr]

I would say the concept of marriage came before religion, Since marriage was one of the earliest institutions established and existed well before man became Civilized enough to consider things like religion.

Actually religion and marriage started about the same time.

The origins of marriage

The institution of marriage is now the subject of a bitter national debate. How did marriage begin and why?

theweek.com

The earliest marriage was about 2350 BC

The 7 Oldest Religions In The World

In today's post, we are on a quest to locate and name the seven oldest religions on Earth. So buckle up; it is going to be a bumpy ride!

www.worldatlas.com

Hinduism is the oldest religion about 4,000 years ago or about 2000 BC

Moses wrote Genesis and the 10 Commandments about 1,500 BC

 

[Anathema]

Sure. Any man stupid enough to let two women into his wallet should get exactly what he deserves.