Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How so? Marriage was first defined as 2 people, 1 male--1 female.
My wife and I will celebrate 15 years together next year. I can honestly say I love her more today than the day I married her. I wouldn't trade that for anything. We dated less than a year before we got married, but we have made the conscious decision to love each other, and our relationship has grown deeper than we ever could have imagined. It's a mindset...not just chemistry.
So, you are among the lucky ones, good for you
Others may try as hard as you, but don't make it for all kinds of reasons.
I'm just curious, because I think anyone that wants more than one spouse is clinically insane, but what is the compelling state interest in banning polygamy?
Anti-gay marriage threads often list this as a potential "slippery slope" consequence of permitting gay marriage (along with a lot of other things that are just ridiculous).
Why should the government care if people want to be in a "plural marriage?"
Please don't respond with "because it changes the traditional definition of marriage", because that's just not really an argument.
There isn't any. If it does not have to be 1 man and 1 woman, then it does not have to be "1". And it does not have to be "consenting" either. Dogs and cats don't "consent" to be our pets. Why should we need their consent to be our marriage partners?
You mean 1 male and multiple 12 year old pieces of property. Get your facts straight.
Indeed, originally marriage was more like a business transaction. The whole romantic aspect was added relatively recently, and in some countries that has not happened yet, at least not for the masses, maybe for the upper class.
I see LOTs of problems with it, just none that ought to be any of the government's business.
It is the gov'ts business. Social Security, child support, food stamps, WIC, health insurance, and others. The issues and problems probably aren't insurmountable, but polygamy lacks the simplicity of 2 people in a civil marriage, the presumption of all marriage-related laws..
I am a monogamist. More than one woman is just a bridge to far for me for a variety if reasons, mostly involving peace of mind.
Most women I know feel the same way!
I can think of lots of social reasons to oppose polygamy, but really, not many legal reasons. I do think it could be difficult for one man plus several wives, some of whom might be pregnant and/or nursing small children, to support a pack of kids. That might be an area where the law would have to step in.
I am a monogamist. More than one woman is just a bridge to far for me for a variety if reasons, mostly involving peace of mind.
Of course it is, but the difference between humans and animals is our ability to act against instinct for higher reasons.
Interestingly, we automatically associate polygamy with one man having more than one wife. One woman having more than one husband is even harder for most people to accept.
Ideally, yes, but the human-animal balance is not the same for all humans
You mean 1 male and multiple 12 year old pieces of property. Get your facts straight.
Nope. I'm not a muslim.
Adam and Eve were the first marriage. It was like that for some time before multiple wives were allowed--largely as a way of providing for women who could not find a man because men had been killed in battle or otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
So, you are among the lucky ones, good for you
Others may try as hard as you, but don't make it for all kinds of reasons.
No "luck" involved. I had ample opportunity to leave her in the past 15 years....and she could have kicked me out on my ear for being a jerk. but we both chose to love each other.
No "luck" involved. I had ample evidence to leave her in the past 15 years....and she could have kicked me out on my ear for being a jerk. but we both chose to love each other.
Sounds weird to me I don't think one can choose to love someone, either one does or one doesn't. Just like one can't choose to like pizza
There isn't any. If it does not have to be 1 man and 1 woman, then it does not have to be "1". And it does not have to be "consenting" either. Dogs and cats don't "consent" to be our pets. Why should we need their consent to be our marriage partners?
Consent is one of the basic foundations of our legal system. Animals cannot consent or sign a contract, and therefore can never apply for a marriage license.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
