Should polygamy be legalized? (Poll)

[Slade3200]

polygamy actually makes more sense because the relationship can create children. Although I oppose it just as I oppose same sex marriage, regardless of the sexuality of the two partners involved.

You opposite it for your own personal life or you oppose it being legal for others to do in America? What is your reasoning?

 

[HeyNorm]

You opposite it for your own personal life or you oppose it being legal for others to do in America? What is your reasoning?

Marriage is a unique civil contract as it limits participation to two individuals. I can’t think of another civil contract in which it is illegal to include more than two.

Allowing multiple to marry created chaos. Limiting it to one man to one woman creates equilibrium

But honestly, that train has left the station.

 

[boedicca]

Oh God No.

History demonstrates that the most successful model for raising healthy children who become responsible adults is a stable, two parent (biological mom and dad) family. Period.

 

[alang1216]

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

Marriage has traditionally been a religious AND a civil union. A religion grants you their blessing and the State grants you various benefits. In my mind the two should be completely separate.

Marriage would be a religious designation, like a confirmation or bar mitzvah, but it would provide not civil benefits, like special tax status. The State would have no authority to compel or forbid any religion from recognizing a marriage.

A civil union would be akin to a contract between adults capable of making their own decisions. The State has no need to judge those decisions, it would only grant them rights for taxes, property, inheritance, etc. A civil union could be between any mix of genders and any number of participants.

You want to get married, find a Church that will marry you. You want civil union benefits, go to city hall.

 

[alang1216]

History demonstrates that the most successful model for raising healthy children who become responsible adults is a stable, two parent (biological mom and dad) family. Period.

Not true. The majority of research on this topic shows that children or adolescents raised by same-sex parents fare equally as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents on a wide range of social, emotional, health and academic outcomes.

 

[Foxfyre]

You opposite it for your own personal life or you oppose it being legal for others to do in America? What is your reasoning?

Government and critical thinkers in society have long recognized the traditional marriage as the NUMBER ONE!!!! institution, far more important than any others, that results in stable communities, good schools, public and shared resources, low crime rate/peace/security/prosperity/stability, and shared values that are constructive for all. A responsible mother and father in the home is 100% the very best recipe for children to become stable, confident, capable, successful, responsible and happy adults.
Double down on all that when communities of mostly stable traditional families are liberally sprinkled with churches and other places of worship. Religion contributes not only purpose and hope for people, but promotes conscience, charity, good will, people helping people through times of difficulty.

The fact that there are also good people in all categories outside the traditional family and/or whatever contrary anecdotes the naysayers will use to argue does not change the fact that without the traditional family, there is less opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for everybody in all categories.

Polygamy so blurs and complicates the lines of ownership, inheritance, lineage, etc. that there is nothing to justify it other than people want to do it. Most legal justification for banning polygamy is based on accepted societal standards for marriage and the public good. Polygamy is seen as lowering the status of women who become a harem governed by a patriarchal ruler who can disfavor one or more while favoring others.

 

[kyzr]

Not true. The majority of research on this topic shows that children or adolescents raised by same-sex parents fare equally as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents on a wide range of social, emotional, health and academic outcomes.

"research" by academics who don't dare say anything positive about normal families, or anything negative about LGBTQ "families".
Got a link for that study? Showing kids raised by same sex parents fare as well as a nuclear family?

 

[alang1216]

"research" by academics who don't dare say anything positive about normal families, or anything negative about LGBTQ "families".
Got a link for that study? Showing kids raised by same sex parents fare as well as a nuclear family?

If you really cared you'd have opened the link I provided and found plenty of sources, including the American Psychological Association. Or do you want me to read to you too?

 

[Red Front]

No, it's completely unnecessary and against God's present covenantal law. God permitted it in the past, under the old covenant, but it's prohibited under the new.

 

[Slade3200]

I can’t think of another civil contract in which it is illegal to include more than two.

Of course you can... Families that have children/dependents include more than 2 people with shared rights in a civil contract.

 

[Slade3200]

Allowing multiple to marry created chaos.

What kind of chaos?

 

[Slade3200]

Oh God No.

History demonstrates that the most successful model for raising healthy children who become responsible adults is a stable, two parent (biological mom and dad) family. Period.

Well then you have every right to make that choice for yourself. The government shouldn't be involved in making that choice for others.

 

[HeyNorm]

Of course you can... Families that have children/dependents include more than 2 people with shared rights in a civil contract.

That’s quit a stretch, there are no applications for such and no signed contracts.

 

[Red Front]

Well then you have every right to make that choice for yourself. The government shouldn't be involved in making that choice for others.

The government, society in general has an interest in marriage and how people organize and raise families, raise children. The government should prohibit incest, homosexual marriage and child adoption, and polygamy. It should only license marriages between a man and a woman, male and female.

 

[Slade3200]

Government and critical thinkers in society have long recognized the traditional marriage as the NUMBER ONE!!!! institution, far more important than any others, that results in stable communities, good schools, public and shared resources, low crime rate/peace/security/prosperity/stability, and shared values that are constructive for all. A responsible mother and father in the home is 100% the very best recipe for children to become stable, confident, capable, successful, responsible and happy adults.
Double down on all that when communities of mostly stable traditional families are liberally sprinkled with churches and other places of worship. Religion contributes not only purpose and hope for people, but promotes conscience, charity, good will, people helping people through times of difficulty.

The fact that there are also good people in all categories outside the traditional family and/or whatever contrary anecdotes the naysayers will use to argue does not change the fact that without the traditional family, there is less opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Polygamy so blurs and complicates the lines of ownership, inheritance, lineage, etc. that there is nothing to justify it other than people want to do it. Most legal justification for banning polygamy is based on accepted societal standards for marriage and the public good. Polygamy is seen as lowering the status of women who become a harem governed by a patriarchal ruler who can disfavor one or more while favoring others.

Well if we gave Government and critical thinkers control of all our choices based on what they think its best for society then we become a communist or socialist country and the people no longer have freedom and liberty. Is that what you want?

 

[HeyNorm]

What kind of chaos?

See post 122

 

[boedicca]

Not true. The majority of research on this topic shows that children or adolescents raised by same-sex parents fare equally as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents on a wide range of social, emotional, health and academic outcomes.

I think that's a lot of spin. It's reasonable for society to assume that same sex partners are going to raise other people's children as a strategy for the future. Those are edge cases - not the model for a sustainable civilization.

 

[Red Front]

Well if we gave Government and critical thinkers control of all our choices based on what they think its best for society then we become a communist or socialist country and the people no longer have freedom and liberty. Is that what you want?

If people can do whatever they want, with respect to marriage, sexuality, and how they raise their children, that will undermine freedom. Chaos is anti-existence, and that's what godless liberals encourage and spread. Demonic chaos.

 

[boedicca]

Well then you have every right to make that choice for yourself. The government shouldn't be involved in making that choice for others.

Agreed. So the government shouldn't put a marriage penalty on couples and put regulations in place that make it more difficult and expensive to raise children.

Nor should the government force anyone to participate in the choices of others (i.e. compulsory wedding cake baking) or paying taxes to support the bad and or personal decisions of others.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

If it is between consenting adults, why should I care?

As it is usually practiced, it really isn't for the women involved.

I mean, unless you think a woman allowing herself to be owned by a man because she comes from a backwards culture is true consent.