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.
Let me preface this discussion by saying I am neutral on the topic and genuinely interested in examining it more...
After watching the show "Big Love" about polygamy, I am a bit at a loss as to why the practice is considered evil. It seems that people who are engaging in polygamy are going to do it anyway, so why not legislate and offer the families the same legal rights as everyone else? It seems crueller to not afford the wives legal protection, thus leaving them vulnerable.
it would also get the women off welfare as they would be officially married and no longer eligible for single-parent benefits. If the husband can afford to maintain the entire family on his own, or the family can otherwise be self-sufficient, what is the problem?
(Please keep gay marriage OUT of this thread. It is not the same thing. Where gay marriage has been legalised, polygamy hasn't increased.)
Who are most against polygmany, conservatives or liberals? And why?
Why do we still continue to legislate mority - it doesn't work! The issue doesn't seem to hurt me or anyone else, so what is wrong with it?
The ratio of one man to one woman is there for a reason.
I'll put it like this: I'm a man. A big part of that is having children. If the chances of me finding someone to do this with are reduced significantly, I'm liable to do anything. Anything.
If every man had two wives, for example, every other man will be wifeless...that is, unable to have kids. If I happened to be in the group of wifeless men, I'd very much be willing to do anything.
I imagine most men would react the same. And, honestly, if I had two wives, and they had none, and they couldn't find one, and I still insisted on having two wives, I'd expect him to do anything as well.
In other words, faced with those conditions, it'd be war, as far as I'm concerned.
The ratio of one man to one woman is there for a reason.
I'll put it like this: I'm a man. A big part of that is having children. If the chances of me finding someone to do this with are reduced significantly, I'm liable to do anything. Anything.
If every man had two wives, for example, every other man will be wifeless...that is, unable to have kids. If I happened to be in the group of wifeless men, I'd very much be willing to do anything.
I imagine most men would react the same. And, honestly, if I had two wives, and they had none, and they couldn't find one, and I still insisted on having two wives, I'd expect him to do anything as well.
In other words, faced with those conditions, it'd be war, as far as I'm concerned.
This argument assumes that, if legal, everyone would engage in polygamy. I think it would be only a tiny section of the community - as it is now.
At any rate, if the argument has merit, then it has positive implications for women - they can choose the cream of the crop to marry as there is more men to go around, and men will have to lower their expectations while raising their own worth to the opposite sex. Sounds like women win.
Perhaps that's why so many (male) lawmakers are opposed to it..
The main reason polygamy is bad is that the majority of men will never be able to find a mate. This is absolutely horrible. Nobody should go through this life without somebody to love. If monogamy is strictly enforced there will be one man for every one woman. All men can get married, raise a family and invest in society. A country where most men have no chance at love will be very unstable. There would be much social unrest.
Children are much better off being raised by a mother and father. You mention all the single mother households we have today. I would strongly argue this is a result of the fact that monogamy has been relaxed in recent years. We have de-facto polygamy today where alpha male players have harems of women while a huge number of other men don't date at all. Many of these same men that no women are interested in would make the best husbands and fathers if given a chance.
I believe monogamy is a cornerstne of Western Civilization. Not only am I anti-polygamy if I could just have one wish it would be that we strictly enforced monogamy and destroyed the lives of every husband who cheats.
This argument assumes that, if legal, everyone would engage in polygamy. I think it would be only a tiny section of the community - as it is now.
At any rate, if the argument has merit, then it has positive implications for women - they can choose the cream of the crop to marry as there is more men to go around, and men will have to lower their expectations while raising their own worth to the opposite sex. Sounds like women win.
Perhaps that's why so many (male) lawmakers are opposed to it..
I don't know, some societies have been overwhelmingly polygamous. So, it's not like it's particularly inconceivable.
I'd say that women wouldn't have much of a choice, actually. "Anything" includes removing consent from the equation.
Single people are essentially polygamist. It's not a problem there. I know working women that want guys who have other girlfriends so they aren't expected to spend a lot of time with them. People should do whatever makes them happy and is within reason.
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.
