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.
Pedophilia is an inevitable consequence of polygamy. Think about it. There are roughly equal numbers of men and women in a given population. (Statistically, there are slightly more women, but that's only because women have a longer life expectancy than men; among young people, the proportion is almost a perfect 50:50.) When you have polygamy, however, one man marries several women -- thus creating a shortage of wives. Consequently, women in polygamous societies are forced into marriage at increasingly younger ages.
You are speaking of cultures that practice polygyny in large quantities. Polygamy itself means any person can have multiple spouses of either gender, and thus would not lead to this at all. Also you are assuming that when one says "polygamy" they are reffering to many many more partners and not simply a 3 person relationship. Lastly you are assuming these people would all congregate in one area thus sucking dry the population of women as they do in some religious cults. ... That is some fairly large assumptions right there. ALL polygamy itself says is "you may marry more than one person." that's it...anything else you add to it is simply your own exaggerations.
I dont travel in those circles in order to make unfounded accusations that individuals are breaking the law. I dont need to list ones that arent, the evidence is on those that make the accusation that "most" are to prove their accusations are true.
Actually, if you want laws to change to parallel those of polygamous societies, the burden is on you to demonstrate that those laws will not have dire consequences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
In this country its innocent until proven guilty, and those found guilty have been put on trial and gone to jail.
As a lawyer, I find this little lecture laughable. The presumption of innocence is a legal fiction applicable in a court of law -- not in a court of public opinion, and certainly no in debate about social policy.
Actually, if you want laws to change to parallel those of polygamous societies, the burden is on you to demonstrate that those laws will not have dire consequences.
As a lawyer, I find this little lecture laughable. The presumption of innocence is a legal fiction applicable in a court of law -- not in a court of public opinion, and certainly no in debate about social policy.
Wrong, NO ONE is supporting changing the laws to allowing pedophilia, there is a HUGE difference...
As a lawyer, you not understanding the difference between polygamy and pedophilia makes me glad your not my lawyer..
And the argument to support polygamy is a LEGAL one, not one hinders on public opinion..
You are speaking of cultures that practice polygyny in large quantities. Polygamy itself means any person can have multiple spouses of either gender, and thus would not lead to this at all.
How do you know this? How do you know that if you legalize polygamy, polygyny won't be practiced "in large quantities"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spokenwordfan
Also you are assuming that when one says "polygamy" they are reffering to many many more partners and not simply a 3 person relationship.
So I take it, you are for legalizing polygamy with 3 partners only? How so? For what reasons aren't you willing to allow, say, 27 consenting adults to marry each other? If you allow a man to have an unlimited number of wives, it's a foreseeable consequence that many men will have well more than 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spokenwordfan
Lastly you are assuming these people would all congregate in one area thus sucking dry the population of women as they do in some religious cults. ...
What makes you think they won't? If you canonize polygamy on a societal scale, it will be practiced on a societal scale -- everywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spokenwordfan
That is some fairly large assumptions right there. ALL polygamy itself says is "you may marry more than one person." that's it...anything else you add to it is simply your own exaggerations.
What polygamy "says" does not end the matter. If you want a drastic change in the law and how our society works, you have to anticipate all the consequences of what polygamy "says".
Wrong, NO ONE is supporting changing the laws to allowing pedophilia, there is a HUGE difference...
No one is supporting it NOW. But wait a few generations, and when there is an acute shortage of wives, you may be willing to redefine "pedophilia" a little bit. Hey, they've done it in Iran -- haven't they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
As a lawyer, you not understanding the difference between polygamy and pedophilia makes me glad your not my lawyer..
"A" may be different from "B", but that does not exclude the likelihood of "A" being a major factor in producing "B". That's like saying there is a difference between shooting and homicide. Sure there is -- the former is one of the means for the latter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
And the argument to support polygamy is a LEGAL one, not one hinders on public opinion..
Again -- legal presumptions apply only to legal proceedings. Your argument, "legal" though it may be, is not done in the context of a legal proceeding. Arguments and ideas have no legal personhood and thus have no standing to benefit from any legal presumption, including that of innocence. Your argument is no more entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty than clouds or chairs would be. This is so idiotic, it's comical.
How do you know this? How do you know that if you legalize polygamy, polygyny won't be practiced "in large quantities"?
There's no real proof that everyone will turn out like isolated cults. Different morals and all.
Quote:
So I take it, you are for legalizing polygamy with 3 partners only? How so? For what reasons aren't you willing to allow, say, 27 consenting adults to marry each other? If you allow a man to have an unlimited number of wives, it's a foreseeable consequence that many men will have well more than 2.
Again, why do you limit only males to having multiple wives?
Although, I do think that a couple can have as many partners as they want, as long as everyone in the situation has no problems with it.
Quote:
What makes you think they won't? If you canonize polygamy on a societal scale, it will be practiced on a societal scale -- everywhere.
Proof? Does everyone marry people of different races? Is everyone turning gay?
There is no problem with three or more willing adults getting married.
Until theres a problem, sickness, divorce, death.
Legalized polygamy will definately be a good thing for attorneys. Marriage is in effect a business contract so I guess there will be some who would choose to form a corporation. I've yet to hear anyone comment on how divorce or death will be handled with regards to seperation of assests, alimony, child support, custody arrangements, SS benefits.
In a legal polygamous marriage would, just for example, each woman only be legally married to the one man or would the women also have the same marital benefits and responsibilities to each other for things such as medical decisions, insurance benefits and debt?
No one is supporting it NOW. But wait a few generations, and when there is an acute shortage of wives, you may be willing to redefine "pedophilia" a little bit. Hey, they've done it in Iran -- haven't they?
Until we can scientifically prove that children can give full consent to such relationships, such a thing will not happen.
And all current studies point to children not being able to consent. It will not happen.
No one is supporting it NOW. But wait a few generations, and when there is an acute shortage of wives, you may be willing to redefine "pedophilia" a little bit. Hey, they've done it in Iran -- haven't they?
Oh, your not making that big of a leap are you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redisca
Again -- legal presumptions apply only to legal proceedings. Your argument, "legal" though it may be, is not done in the context of a legal proceeding. Arguments and ideas have no legal personhood and thus have no standing to benefit from any legal presumption, including that of innocence. Your argument is no more entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty than clouds or chairs would be. This is so idiotic, it's comical.
Since the argument to make polygamy legal is based upon LEGAL proceedings, then you cant go and make the leap that it will be LEGAL to rape little children. Thats just so far out there because the topic is polygamy and gays, not raping children...
Totally misleading title... gays aren't supporting polygamy. Polygamists are trying to gain the same rights as gays....
I am sure you didn't mean to twist the truth a little, did you?
By the way, the first link does not work.
"Those who are at peace in their hearts already are in the Great Shelter of Life. There is no shelter for evil. When the Saquahuh (blue Star) Kachina dances in the plaza and removes his mask, the time of the great trial will be here."
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.
