I've always maintained that polygamy is cool in theory. In practice, however, the state of Utah has done a rather good job of demonstrating that it's misogynist as all ****. And ++ on the tax and property laws.
...how? It's banned there too.
It certainly is. Now search for cases wherein the crime of polygamy has actually been prosecuted in Utah and let me know what you come up with.
No moral qualms here. However, there's a pretty severe practical issue: children. TIME ran an article a month or few back about the subject, featuring a man with three wives and over twenty children (link). With population being the issue it is, is it really necessary to produce so many kids? Granted, the same thing is possible with only one spouse, but it's a lot harder.
That has more to do with the number of children per woman.
If those same three women married three different men and gave birth to about 7 children each, it would be the same as far as population growth.
It may be that people inclined towards polygamy are more inclined to have gigantic families like that though. I'm not sure that giving their relationship legal recognition would really encourage that type of behavior though.
There are other polygamous/polyamorous types who are not so interested in making as many babies as possible. Particularly if the marriage has more men than women, there's more likely to be fewer children than if the men each had their own wives.
It's interesting to read some of the responses here. I imagine that most of the people in this thread do support gay marriage yet I am hearing some very similar arguments against poly marriage in this thread that are being made against gay marriage. Many people do not support gay marriage because they think having 2 daddies is psychologically damaging to the children. Similar to the population explosion argument there are people who think homosexuality will spread causing a problematic drop in population. Despite there being no reason to believe either one would spread beyond what is already being done without the official marriage title. There are also people who believed the majority of homosexual males were just pedophiles that want to get with little boys...
Remember just like in the case of homosexual marriage there is nothing preventing people from living the lifestyle. Also just like in the case of homosexuality there will be people in that grouping of people that do things outside the law, whether it be molesting little boys or illegally marrying little girls, but that does not make it right to oppress the entire group.
Realistically the only argument in my mind that can be made is that the legal implications are a mess and it would be easier to let those families write up their legal documents on a case by case basis however the state should be required to provide the same benefits of being married to all parties in the plural marriage.
Again, for those who have a very negative view of polygamy, it would be beneficial for you to see "Sister Wives". While their lifestyle still makes no sense to me and I cannot imagine how the wives are able to do what they do, they are pretty much just a regular family. No cult like preaching to their children, no hunting down young girls for the dad to marry. Just a big family trying to raise their kids while dealing with the social and legal issues that come with their life style choice.
While theoretically no form of marriage is more or less moral. In practice polygamy tends to lead to a large number of single sexually frustrated men, which is bad for society.
A 40 dollar mythic rare would constitute a must have 4 of that goes in many decks.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled. I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Again, for those who have a very negative view of polygamy, it would be beneficial for you to see "Sister Wives". While their lifestyle still makes no sense to me and I cannot imagine how the wives are able to do what they do, they are pretty much just a regular family. No cult like preaching to their children, no hunting down young girls for the dad to marry. Just a big family trying to raise their kids while dealing with the social and legal issues that come with their life style choice.
For one, they wouldn't agree to be on the TV show if they didn't have some control over how they are presented. They're not going to present things that put the family in a negative light.
We don't see what kind of preaching they do almost at all, so it's not really clear how they really hand down religion to the children.
And while they're undoubtedly much better than the Mormons who live on the compound on gender roles, they kind of gloss over a lot of the sexism of the lifestyle. Kody clearly is not the smartest adult in the house, yet he has the final say on most decisions. He might not have absolute decision-making power, but he clearly has the most power.
When his first wife has a problem with his decision to add a fourth wife, it is framed as being her problem of not relinquishing control rather than a legitimate reason for her to be upset. It's something she has to struggle with as a test of her faith. By contrast, you can be assured that they would never be allowed to take another man, and that Kody's jealousy would be seen as righteous. They have to struggle with jealousy and the hurt feelings when Kody plays favorites - Kody is not expected to deal with any such test of faith.
I'm not saying they're horrible. There are some things that they do which are admirable or even a bit feminist (even as the women reject feminism as evil). Janelle has her own career and prioritizes it over childcare, which she can do since her sister wives take care of her children when she's not around. As far as fundamentalist polygamists go, they're pretty tame (this is not coincidental - the fact that they were willing to go on TV is probably related to that). But I wouldn't assume that their relationship is not problematic.
The lost boys problem exasperated by unequal ability in Mormon sects that practice polygamy place a real strain on social safety nets in those regions, as it creates bad competition for mates since for the older males to have more wives they must cull the excess male population. That is the specific reason why I dislike polygamy in the American sense.
Considering the African sense where disease spreads through wife sharing and having multiple wives, among other idiot "cures" like sleeping with a virgin to get rid of HIV, are another factor. Disease is often related to age, as we have more partners more people are more open sexually and therefore more likely to carry some STD.
There are times where polygamy does work, there are times in which it does not. Trying to pretend that everything works and is all kicky cool isn't the way to go about problems, nor subsidizing stupid behaviors.
For example, if a Mormon sect likes to drive out boys, having legal prosecution brought against the sect to care for the boys would be fair.
Polygamy just isn't enforced that much, the excesses like drugs have to begin to place more constraints on these types of institutions. However, if we consider where polygamy was practiced because of lack of travel and the like, as soon as the infrastructure changes the amount of polygamists drops rather suddenly such as areas of the Himalayas. Polygamy does come with a lot of headaches too, and it does make sex very complicated.
I'm not saying they're horrible. There are some things that they do which are admirable or even a bit feminist (even as the women reject feminism as evil). Janelle has her own career and prioritizes it over childcare, which she can do since her sister wives take care of her children when she's not around. As far as fundamentalist polygamists go, they're pretty tame (this is not coincidental - the fact that they were willing to go on TV is probably related to that). But I wouldn't assume that their relationship is not problematic.
Actually I would be interested to see how they would deal with gay polygamist marriages in their sects, especially women marrying other women taking women out of the marriage pool.
Polygamy is not psychologically a good relationship. The one on the multiple end (usually females) have a hard time feeling secure in their relationship due to not being "the one". However homosexual relationships have been found to be just as sound and psychologically healthy as heterosexual monogonus relationships.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Polygamy is not psychologically a good relationship. The one on the multiple end (usually females) have a hard time feeling secure in their relationship due to not being "the one". However homosexual relationships have been found to be just as sound and psychologically healthy as heterosexual monogonus relationships.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Nothing says you can't have polyamerous relationships but certain things that are actaully regulated via the government are restricted to marriage. Things like adopting children, tax breaks, divorse, ect. All those become exceedingly more difficult when you add in things like Polyigamy. And the big one is adopting children. They should not be able to adopt children if they are in a polygiamistic relationship. IT casues a lot of confusion with children. You can't stop people from being prego but you can stop them from adopting.
Things like that DO need to be regulated with the government. But if you dont' want government regulation then why legalize polygamy at all?
Polygamy is not psychologically a good relationship. The one on the multiple end (usually females) have a hard time feeling secure in their relationship due to not being "the one". However homosexual relationships have been found to be just as sound and psychologically healthy as heterosexual monogonus relationships.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Nothing says you can't have polyamerous relationships but certain things that are actaully regulated via the government are restricted to marriage. Things like adopting children, tax breaks, divorse, ect. All those become exceedingly more difficult when you add in things like Polyigamy. And the big one is adopting children. They should not be able to adopt children if they are in a polygiamistic relationship. IT casues a lot of confusion with children. You can't stop people from being prego but you can stop them from adopting.
Things like that DO need to be regulated with the government. But if you dont' want government regulation then why legalize polygamy at all?
Why kind of confusion makes it worthwhile for the government to restrict it, though?
Polygamy is not psychologically a good relationship. The one on the multiple end (usually females) have a hard time feeling secure in their relationship due to not being "the one". However homosexual relationships have been found to be just as sound and psychologically healthy as heterosexual monogonus relationships.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Nothing says you can't have polyamerous relationships but certain things that are actaully regulated via the government are restricted to marriage. Things like adopting children, tax breaks, divorse, ect. All those become exceedingly more difficult when you add in things like Polyigamy. And the big one is adopting children. They should not be able to adopt children if they are in a polygiamistic relationship. IT casues a lot of confusion with children. You can't stop people from being prego but you can stop them from adopting.
Things like that DO need to be regulated with the government. But if you dont' want government regulation then why legalize polygamy at all?
Why kind of confusion makes it worthwhile for the government to restrict it, though?
Okay. I'll typte it out in bits and pieces.
Children.......being.......adopted.
It is PROVEN that being raised in a polyamerous home casues developmental issues. Just as the same as you can't adopt if you are a child molester, single, sex offender of any kind, known for spousal or animal abuse, obscenly poor, or just about any other negative thing that can be proven for a child.
Polygamy is not psychologically a good relationship. The one on the multiple end (usually females) have a hard time feeling secure in their relationship due to not being "the one". However homosexual relationships have been found to be just as sound and psychologically healthy as heterosexual monogonus relationships.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Nothing says you can't have polyamerous relationships but certain things that are actaully regulated via the government are restricted to marriage. Things like adopting children, tax breaks, divorse, ect. All those become exceedingly more difficult when you add in things like Polyigamy. And the big one is adopting children. They should not be able to adopt children if they are in a polygiamistic relationship. IT casues a lot of confusion with children. You can't stop people from being prego but you can stop them from adopting.
Things like that DO need to be regulated with the government. But if you dont' want government regulation then why legalize polygamy at all?
Why kind of confusion makes it worthwhile for the government to restrict it, though?
Okay. I'll typte it out in bits and pieces.
Children.......being.......adopted.
It is PROVEN that being raised in a polyamerous home casues developmental issues. Just as the same as you can't adopt if you are a child molester, single, sex offender of any kind, known for spousal or animal abuse, obscenly poor, or just about any other negative thing that can be proven for a child.
Citation needed. When has this been studied?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Gabgabdevo for the awesome sig image!
I'm always looking for foil Madcap Skills and Ghitu Fire-Eater, [trade thread link forthcoming]
That is a poor site but i'm on very limited internet right now. I"ll search for more. But several people have studied it. the largets numbers of polygamy is actually in Africa rather than america or anywhere else in the world and its strickly because women there are incapable of getting high paid jobs and without a father figure to provide for them there its impossible to get out of poverty.
That is a poor site but i'm on very limited internet right now. I"ll search for more. But several people have studied it. the largets numbers of polygamy is actually in Africa rather than america or anywhere else in the world and its strickly because women there are incapable of getting high paid jobs and without a father figure to provide for them there its impossible to get out of poverty.
And I am sure if I did some digging especially at sources from 10+ years ago I would find plenty of evidence to suggest that children being raised in a homosexual household causes "developmental issues". I could also find studies suggesting children are worse off in single parent homes. We allow adoption in those cases. Did you know it is also perfectly fine for the Amish to adopt despite having a radically different life style than "normal"?
I also would like to know if polygamist marriage isnt allowed how are you going to prevent polygamists from adopting? You're going to tell people that if they are polygamists in lifestyle that they can't adopt and then expect them to check "polygamy" on a form? Does that than also extend into swingers?
I dont see how polygamy is any worse than idiot teenage guys running around knocking up 12 different baby mommas. At least in the case of polygamy the wives and husband are there to raise the kids instead of making a bunch of single moms fighting for child support.
It sounds more like the people in this thread have an issue with the religion more so than the actual act of being in a polygamist relationship.
Also, why do people insist on bring up the healthy mating pool arguments? If polygamy were to become legal it isnt like a significant portion of the world population is going to suddenly convert. If it were to switch over time to be that polygamy makes up a significant percentage of the population then I guess the lifestyle has more merits than we thought and it should be allowed anyway.
Again, for those who have a very negative view of polygamy, it would be beneficial for you to see "Sister Wives". While their lifestyle still makes no sense to me and I cannot imagine how the wives are able to do what they do, they are pretty much just a regular family. No cult like preaching to their children, no hunting down young girls for the dad to marry. Just a big family trying to raise their kids while dealing with the social and legal issues that come with their life style choice.
Are you seriously asking people to base their opinions of polygamy and its ramifications by using information from a T.V. show shown on TLC?
Can you see how problematic that is on multiple levels?
Again, for those who have a very negative view of polygamy, it would be beneficial for you to see "Sister Wives". While their lifestyle still makes no sense to me and I cannot imagine how the wives are able to do what they do, they are pretty much just a regular family. No cult like preaching to their children, no hunting down young girls for the dad to marry. Just a big family trying to raise their kids while dealing with the social and legal issues that come with their life style choice.
Are you seriously asking people to base their opinions of polygamy and its ramifications by using information from a T.V. show shown on TLC?
Can you see how problematic that is on multiple levels?
Actually I am asking them to look at it as an example of how not all polygamists are cultists that want to marry 12 year old girls to 50 year old men.
What ramifications are you speaking of? As of yet I havent heard any in this thread that should prevent polygamy from being legalized.
Polygamy and homosexual, either way, every one deserves to be miserable just like the rest of us. My only quarrel with polygamy is, that it does not diversify the gene pool. Thus could lead to weird genetic mutations, that could negatively impact society. (idiocracy anyone?)
Polygamy and homosexual, either way, every one deserves to be miserable just like the rest of us. My only quarrel with polygamy is, that it does not diversify the gene pool. Thus could lead to weird genetic mutations, that could negatively impact society. (idiocracy anyone?)
I'm not seeing your train of thought leading from polygamy to lack of genetic diversity, could you elaborate on it for me?
That is a poor site but i'm on very limited internet right now. I"ll search for more. But several people have studied it. the largets numbers of polygamy is actually in Africa rather than america or anywhere else in the world and its strickly because women there are incapable of getting high paid jobs and without a father figure to provide for them there its impossible to get out of poverty.
And I am sure if I did some digging especially at sources from 10+ years ago I would find plenty of evidence to suggest that children being raised in a homosexual household causes "developmental issues". I could also find studies suggesting children are worse off in single parent homes. We allow adoption in those cases. Did you know it is also perfectly fine for the Amish to adopt despite having a radically different life style than "normal"?
I also would like to know if polygamist marriage isnt allowed how are you going to prevent polygamists from adopting? You're going to tell people that if they are polygamists in lifestyle that they can't adopt and then expect them to check "polygamy" on a form? Does that than also extend into swingers?
I dont see how polygamy is any worse than idiot teenage guys running around knocking up 12 different baby mommas. At least in the case of polygamy the wives and husband are there to raise the kids instead of making a bunch of single moms fighting for child support.
It sounds more like the people in this thread have an issue with the religion more so than the actual act of being in a polygamist relationship.
Also, why do people insist on bring up the healthy mating pool arguments? If polygamy were to become legal it isnt like a significant portion of the world population is going to suddenly convert. If it were to switch over time to be that polygamy makes up a significant percentage of the population then I guess the lifestyle has more merits than we thought and it should be allowed anyway.
True. However those have been debunked. Time will tell honestly.
Also Amish are allowed to adopt and its not that their lifestyle is negative psychologically but rather simply radically different. Polygamy has recorded devestating effects on children. In fact not one study that I have found has said anything otherwise. Its negative for the women (if its a male and many women) its bad for the children and the only one not negativly affected is the Man. Even in historical polygamy was a non-sexual relationsihp. It was completely platonic and used b/c women couldn't support themselves back in those days. It was a man's world and she would be doomed to poverty if another man didn't take her in. Usually it was the brother or cousin of the man who died. A man usually didn't simply "take a new wife" unless he was rich or the woman was getting too old to marry and again it was simply for economic reasons.
EDIT:
And if we can't trust the research then what do we trust? our gut? I don't like that. Just because some older and biased studies were proving something doesn't disprove ALL research forever and always.
I would be interested to see the details on that research. It raises a lot of questions like where did they find the polygamist families to study? Were they volunteers or families that were part of a cult-like setting where the state came in arrested the parents and then sat the kids down with counselors? What kind of negative psychological effects does polygamy actually have on the children?
I cant think of any obvious effects that it would have. I especially can't think of any negative effects that would happen beyond what other legal family settings would cause. Is it worse for a child to grow up in polygamy than to grow up with a single mother of 5 from 5 different daddies?
I cannot imagine polygamy not leading to tension between all the involved parties.
This is my fundamental issue with polygamy- if marriage is meant to be between two people who love each other in the modern sense, then why is it necessary to marry another man/woman?
It effectively creates a great sense of insecurity in the household. Why need another husband? Why need another wife?
Jealousy is a very real thing, and I do not buy the idea that if both partners accept another partner, then everything will be right as rain. People's mind change. What they often felt they can handle, they quickly learn they cannot.
And it is virtually fact that tension and problems between spouses can have a terribly negative influence on children. I am an adult, and I am still bothered whenever I hear my parents raise their voices at one another.
I cannot imagine polygamy not leading to tension between all the involved parties.
This is my fundamental issue with polygamy- if marriage is meant to be between two people who love each other in the modern sense, then why is it necessary to marry another man/woman?
It effectively creates a great sense of insecurity in the household. Why need another husband? Why need another wife?
Who cares? That is their problem not my problem. There are people who want to be in that situation. So much so that they choose to do it illegally. Also if you were to ask me what marriage is about from the government's perspective I would say it has nothing at all to do with love. Marriage grants a group of people a set of rights and privileges based on their commitment to each other.
Jealousy is a very real thing, and I do not buy the idea that if both partners accept another partner, then everything will be right as rain. People's mind change. What they often felt they can handle, they quickly learn they cannot.
And it is virtually fact that tension and problems between spouses can have a terribly negative influence on children. I am an adult, and I am still bothered whenever I hear my parents raise their voices at one another.
So would you then say that swinging and other forms of adultery should be made illegal? People often think they can forgive the other partner after they cheat but they quickly learn they cannot forgive them, should we force divorces when someone in a marriage cheats? How about financial issues? Should it be illegal to disagree on finances with your spouse?
I live in the United States and all remarks here are intended towards US laws (don't want a "No, in France" or "You obviously don't know that in my country" type responses). I have always been pro an overhaul in what is legally involved in civil unions. For starters, I would prefer a separation of the terms marriage and civil unions to where marriage is a nonlegal term specific to your personal views on commitment and that civil union is a term referring to a legally binding contract between two consenting adults that allows for legal assistance and joint custody of debt and possessions. This would mean that if a church married a man and a bird in a solemn religious ceremony creating an emotional bonding of man and fowl before their god and their minister, then nobody could say anything about what the Supreme Court might say. And if that same Man and pigeon tried to file for a civil union so the person could file the bird as a dependent the courts would say, "Sorry, we don't recognize animals as we do humans in legal terms of ownership." It would be a legal term and religion or personal emotional views wouldn't enter into it. Now there would obviously be debates over who should be allowed but it would come down to who can legally sign a contract, not who god intended. Now I am a Christian man of faith. My views are more libertarian than many people and that is fine. I believe in my view of marriage between a man and woman before God, but believe two guys can love each other and should be able to file taxes together. And if they believe they can get married before the guy who introduced them and that is their way of showing their love and commitment, fine. I'm not gonna denounce them or throw eggs at their wedding party or even say that their opinion is stupid. I'll fight for their right to have their own view. As long as they don't try to stop straight people fromgetting married we won't have any problems. So more to the op's question, this would be me saying that though I don't believe in polygamous mariiage, I do believe if three, four, or a whole commune want to become a legal entity together, the law should allow it, imho.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Petition to stop WotC from making M:tG cards that do not fit my specific likes! Join the revolution! If not you, then who?
Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent.-Friedrich Nietzsche
Sometimes I feel like the word "interactivity" around here is akin to the word "electrolytes" in sports drinks. The public doesn't really know what it means, but they figure it's a good thing to have.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It certainly is. Now search for cases wherein the crime of polygamy has actually been prosecuted in Utah and let me know what you come up with.
If those same three women married three different men and gave birth to about 7 children each, it would be the same as far as population growth.
It may be that people inclined towards polygamy are more inclined to have gigantic families like that though. I'm not sure that giving their relationship legal recognition would really encourage that type of behavior though.
There are other polygamous/polyamorous types who are not so interested in making as many babies as possible. Particularly if the marriage has more men than women, there's more likely to be fewer children than if the men each had their own wives.
Remember just like in the case of homosexual marriage there is nothing preventing people from living the lifestyle. Also just like in the case of homosexuality there will be people in that grouping of people that do things outside the law, whether it be molesting little boys or illegally marrying little girls, but that does not make it right to oppress the entire group.
Realistically the only argument in my mind that can be made is that the legal implications are a mess and it would be easier to let those families write up their legal documents on a case by case basis however the state should be required to provide the same benefits of being married to all parties in the plural marriage.
Again, for those who have a very negative view of polygamy, it would be beneficial for you to see "Sister Wives". While their lifestyle still makes no sense to me and I cannot imagine how the wives are able to do what they do, they are pretty much just a regular family. No cult like preaching to their children, no hunting down young girls for the dad to marry. Just a big family trying to raise their kids while dealing with the social and legal issues that come with their life style choice.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled.
I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
We don't see what kind of preaching they do almost at all, so it's not really clear how they really hand down religion to the children.
And while they're undoubtedly much better than the Mormons who live on the compound on gender roles, they kind of gloss over a lot of the sexism of the lifestyle. Kody clearly is not the smartest adult in the house, yet he has the final say on most decisions. He might not have absolute decision-making power, but he clearly has the most power.
When his first wife has a problem with his decision to add a fourth wife, it is framed as being her problem of not relinquishing control rather than a legitimate reason for her to be upset. It's something she has to struggle with as a test of her faith. By contrast, you can be assured that they would never be allowed to take another man, and that Kody's jealousy would be seen as righteous. They have to struggle with jealousy and the hurt feelings when Kody plays favorites - Kody is not expected to deal with any such test of faith.
I'm not saying they're horrible. There are some things that they do which are admirable or even a bit feminist (even as the women reject feminism as evil). Janelle has her own career and prioritizes it over childcare, which she can do since her sister wives take care of her children when she's not around. As far as fundamentalist polygamists go, they're pretty tame (this is not coincidental - the fact that they were willing to go on TV is probably related to that). But I wouldn't assume that their relationship is not problematic.
Considering the African sense where disease spreads through wife sharing and having multiple wives, among other idiot "cures" like sleeping with a virgin to get rid of HIV, are another factor. Disease is often related to age, as we have more partners more people are more open sexually and therefore more likely to carry some STD.
There are times where polygamy does work, there are times in which it does not. Trying to pretend that everything works and is all kicky cool isn't the way to go about problems, nor subsidizing stupid behaviors.
For example, if a Mormon sect likes to drive out boys, having legal prosecution brought against the sect to care for the boys would be fair.
Polygamy just isn't enforced that much, the excesses like drugs have to begin to place more constraints on these types of institutions. However, if we consider where polygamy was practiced because of lack of travel and the like, as soon as the infrastructure changes the amount of polygamists drops rather suddenly such as areas of the Himalayas. Polygamy does come with a lot of headaches too, and it does make sex very complicated.
Actually I would be interested to see how they would deal with gay polygamist marriages in their sects, especially women marrying other women taking women out of the marriage pool.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
As long as it's consensual, why should that matter? It's not the government's business, and if it is a "bad decision," then should people not be allowed to make "bad decisions?"
Nothing says you can't have polyamerous relationships but certain things that are actaully regulated via the government are restricted to marriage. Things like adopting children, tax breaks, divorse, ect. All those become exceedingly more difficult when you add in things like Polyigamy. And the big one is adopting children. They should not be able to adopt children if they are in a polygiamistic relationship. IT casues a lot of confusion with children. You can't stop people from being prego but you can stop them from adopting.
Things like that DO need to be regulated with the government. But if you dont' want government regulation then why legalize polygamy at all?
Why kind of confusion makes it worthwhile for the government to restrict it, though?
Okay. I'll typte it out in bits and pieces.
Children.......being.......adopted.
It is PROVEN that being raised in a polyamerous home casues developmental issues. Just as the same as you can't adopt if you are a child molester, single, sex offender of any kind, known for spousal or animal abuse, obscenly poor, or just about any other negative thing that can be proven for a child.
Citation needed. When has this been studied?
Thanks to Gabgabdevo for the awesome sig image!
I'm always looking for foil Madcap Skills and Ghitu Fire-Eater, [trade thread link forthcoming]
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/nature/news-polygamy-life-childhood-psychiatric-effects
That is a poor site but i'm on very limited internet right now. I"ll search for more. But several people have studied it. the largets numbers of polygamy is actually in Africa rather than america or anywhere else in the world and its strickly because women there are incapable of getting high paid jobs and without a father figure to provide for them there its impossible to get out of poverty.
here is another.
I've found several scholarly soucres but I can't link you to them because they are on restricted databases (as most credible scholarly sources are)
This is one of the better ones if you can find a way to read it on another site.
Draft it on Cubetutor!
And I am sure if I did some digging especially at sources from 10+ years ago I would find plenty of evidence to suggest that children being raised in a homosexual household causes "developmental issues". I could also find studies suggesting children are worse off in single parent homes. We allow adoption in those cases. Did you know it is also perfectly fine for the Amish to adopt despite having a radically different life style than "normal"?
I also would like to know if polygamist marriage isnt allowed how are you going to prevent polygamists from adopting? You're going to tell people that if they are polygamists in lifestyle that they can't adopt and then expect them to check "polygamy" on a form? Does that than also extend into swingers?
I dont see how polygamy is any worse than idiot teenage guys running around knocking up 12 different baby mommas. At least in the case of polygamy the wives and husband are there to raise the kids instead of making a bunch of single moms fighting for child support.
It sounds more like the people in this thread have an issue with the religion more so than the actual act of being in a polygamist relationship.
Also, why do people insist on bring up the healthy mating pool arguments? If polygamy were to become legal it isnt like a significant portion of the world population is going to suddenly convert. If it were to switch over time to be that polygamy makes up a significant percentage of the population then I guess the lifestyle has more merits than we thought and it should be allowed anyway.
When we talk about gay marriage are we talking about 2 gay people getting married or legitimizing giant AIDs spreading gay orgies?
That is basically what you just asked.
Are you seriously asking people to base their opinions of polygamy and its ramifications by using information from a T.V. show shown on TLC?
Can you see how problematic that is on multiple levels?
Actually I am asking them to look at it as an example of how not all polygamists are cultists that want to marry 12 year old girls to 50 year old men.
What ramifications are you speaking of? As of yet I havent heard any in this thread that should prevent polygamy from being legalized.
My Trades
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=459514
Moderator Help Desk
Sales Thread
True. However those have been debunked. Time will tell honestly.
Also Amish are allowed to adopt and its not that their lifestyle is negative psychologically but rather simply radically different. Polygamy has recorded devestating effects on children. In fact not one study that I have found has said anything otherwise. Its negative for the women (if its a male and many women) its bad for the children and the only one not negativly affected is the Man. Even in historical polygamy was a non-sexual relationsihp. It was completely platonic and used b/c women couldn't support themselves back in those days. It was a man's world and she would be doomed to poverty if another man didn't take her in. Usually it was the brother or cousin of the man who died. A man usually didn't simply "take a new wife" unless he was rich or the woman was getting too old to marry and again it was simply for economic reasons.
EDIT:
And if we can't trust the research then what do we trust? our gut? I don't like that. Just because some older and biased studies were proving something doesn't disprove ALL research forever and always.
I cant think of any obvious effects that it would have. I especially can't think of any negative effects that would happen beyond what other legal family settings would cause. Is it worse for a child to grow up in polygamy than to grow up with a single mother of 5 from 5 different daddies?
This is my fundamental issue with polygamy- if marriage is meant to be between two people who love each other in the modern sense, then why is it necessary to marry another man/woman?
It effectively creates a great sense of insecurity in the household. Why need another husband? Why need another wife?
Jealousy is a very real thing, and I do not buy the idea that if both partners accept another partner, then everything will be right as rain. People's mind change. What they often felt they can handle, they quickly learn they cannot.
And it is virtually fact that tension and problems between spouses can have a terribly negative influence on children. I am an adult, and I am still bothered whenever I hear my parents raise their voices at one another.
Who cares? That is their problem not my problem. There are people who want to be in that situation. So much so that they choose to do it illegally. Also if you were to ask me what marriage is about from the government's perspective I would say it has nothing at all to do with love. Marriage grants a group of people a set of rights and privileges based on their commitment to each other.
So would you then say that swinging and other forms of adultery should be made illegal? People often think they can forgive the other partner after they cheat but they quickly learn they cannot forgive them, should we force divorces when someone in a marriage cheats? How about financial issues? Should it be illegal to disagree on finances with your spouse?
Banner ala Lymons