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.
This is off topic, but as an interesting aside. Gay marriage is taken to be 'progressive' and it's assumed that everywhere in the world is marching towards progression. Well, in many parts of the world, you have what you can consider 'regression.' Chechnya was considered a liberal part of the kavkaz before the wars, since communist Soviet Union and deportation of the men across the USSR.
In 2009, the leader, Kadyrov, said this (rough translation):
Quote:
"We have more women than men here, in Chechnya, and all women need to be settled in life. Our traditions and religion allow polygamy, if a young girl or a divorced woman is promiscuous, her brother kills her and her man. Our traditions are very harsh. It is better for a woman to be the second or the third wife, than to be dead. I am sure, we need polygamy today. There is no such law, but I address everyone: those who have a possibility and a wish should take another wife."
Kadyrov was put in place by Putin to keep Chechnya, while semi-independent, in Russia's orbit and to clamp down on Muslim extremism. The tradition of polygamy has surfaced since the wars but hasn't been prevalent in the region for maybe a 100-200 years since then. Now Chechnya is probably one of the most strict regions in the world for women rights.
Some people go "forward" and some "backward."
Last edited by zombieApocExtraordinaire; 03-24-2013 at 11:04 PM..
I didn't think it out when I started with the hypothetical so I'm going with the flow. The series of 2-person contracts is just so polygamy can function like it does elsewhere. You could have a multiple contract too, again all these details can get hammered out. But the point is, when you debark from tradition, you get a confusing mess.
Anyways, the series of 2 person contracts are in keeping with the spirit of civil marriage provided the women knew ahead of time.
Yeah, but the series of contracts doesn't work when the contract confers certain rights that can really only be exercised by one person. For instance, marriage gives one's spouse the right to make medical decisions (emergency situations, pull-the-plug or keep on life support situations, etc) when the other spouse cannot.
If that right is given to 6 different women, they could come to 6 different decisions.
In either construction (a multiple person contract or a series of 2-person contracts), extending civil marriage to groups isn't feasible and doesn't make sense.
Which is why I had no good answer to that. Usually the son makes the decision. I'm guessing the husband can appoint a wife to make that decision.
So the husband gets to waive the legal rights of his wife (or wives)? LOL
Again, I'm just pointing out how and why it's ridiculous to compare civil gay marriage to polygamous marriage or to even talk about polygamy in the context of civil marriage. And again, I support consensual polygamy, it just doesn't fit into the framework of civil marriage.
So the husband gets to waive the legal rights of his wife (or wives)? LOL
.
To decide on the medical issues of the ailing husband is not a legal right for the wife but the husband. Even now, the husband can waive away his wife's right and choose someone else if he stipulates it in contract beforehand (otherwise it's assumed to be the wife).
To decide on the medical issues of the ailing husband is not a legal right for the wife but the husband. Even now, the husband can waive away his wife's right and choose someone else if he stipulates it in contract beforehand (otherwise it's assumed to be the wife).
Lol, you're being ridiculous.
You can't just waive your spouses rights and choose someone else if you feel like it. It doesn't work that way.
You can't just waive your spouses rights and choose someone else if you feel like it. It doesn't work that way.
Again, it's not your spouses right to make medical decisions on your behalf. It's YOUR right, which the government assume, absent any other documents, you wish your spouse to make. You can override that with documents.
Many gays support or are OK with polygamy. Just a fact.
I'm totally in favor of gay marriage, but completely against polygamy. I think all marriages, gay and straight, need to be 2 people. Harems are sick little things.
I'm totally in favor of gay marriage, but completely against polygamy. I think all marriages, gay and straight, need to be 2 people. Harems are sick little things.
No one cares what you support. This is what logically follows the consequences of redefining marriage.
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.
