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.
Polygamy should definitely be legal. Why should my love be restricted to only one person?
Incest - as long as both people are of legal age why shouldn't they be allowed to marry? Love is love.
Yup. If it's about love, it's about love. The law should be modified so that any consenting adults (no matter how many in the group) can marry. It's not the government's place to say who can and cannot marry anymore. Marriage was once needed to protect women and children but no longer serves that purpose. Today women can have careers and support themselves and with DNA tests there's no doubt who's the daddy so we don't need marriage defining who is responsible for the children produced in a union. Marriage has changed. It's now just about people who love each other so why not let any consenting adults who want to marry?
Yup. If it's about love, it's about love. The law should be modified so that any consenting adults (no matter how many in the group) can marry. It's not the government's place to say who can and cannot marry anymore. Marriage was once needed to protect women and children but no longer serves that purpose. Today women can have careers and support themselves and with DNA tests there's no doubt who's the daddy so we don't need marriage defining who is responsible for the children produced in a union. Marriage has changed. It's now just about people who love each other so why not let any consenting adults who want to marry?
all right, if you are going to get the government out of marriage, then it has to be a complete withdrawal. no more having the government force someone to pay child support, no more having the government force someone to pay alimony in a divorce, in fact no more the government deciding divorce proceedings. everyone is on their own. thus if a guy knocks up 10 women, and then chooses not to pay child support, then tough for the women that decided to get pregnant by this guy. if a woman decides to leave her husband, and takes all the good assets, and leave hubby with the debts and the crap, then tough on hubby for being stupid enough to either marry in the first place and mix assets, or not seeing what was coming and making arraignments to protect his assets and keep the wife from cleaning him out.
Yup. If it's about love, it's about love. The law should be modified so that any consenting adults (no matter how many in the group) can marry. It's not the government's place to say who can and cannot marry anymore. Marriage was once needed to protect women and children but no longer serves that purpose. Today women can have careers and support themselves and with DNA tests there's no doubt who's the daddy so we don't need marriage defining who is responsible for the children produced in a union. Marriage has changed. It's now just about people who love each other so why not let any consenting adults who want to marry?
I agree with your post, and that the state shouldn't have any say over what two consenting people do. As a slightly off topic point, I recently heard someone talking about modern feminism and how there's this attitude that women don't need men...but they often rely on the government and its agents, which is made up of mostly men...but anyway, he was saying that if we do have some type of disaster or economic struggle, we'll see how long women keep that attitude. He'd say "well...we're happy to help, but where's our apology?"
I just thought it was an interesting point that the more safe and secure our society is, the more men and women think they'll be fine without each other, but when things fall apart they'll realize the mistake they made. As I said, off topic but thought it was a good point.
So if the constitution can just be tossed aside now and same sex marriage is legal, why not polygamy and prostitution? If two consenting adults of the same sex can be married and its not hurting anyone, why can't 3, 4 or 5 consenting adults be married? Its not hurting anyone. Why can't two consenting adults exchange money for sexual intercourse? Its not hurting anyone. This my friends is what you call a slippery slope. You can start rationalizing many things now. Where do you draw the line?
Where the individuals involved are not consenting adults.
A black muslim should challenge the laws against polygamy.
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.
Yup. If it's about love, it's about love. The law should be modified so that any consenting adults (no matter how many in the group) can marry. It's not the government's place to say who can and cannot marry anymore. Marriage was once needed to protect women and children but no longer serves that purpose. Today women can have careers and support themselves and with DNA tests there's no doubt who's the daddy so we don't need marriage defining who is responsible for the children produced in a union. Marriage has changed. It's now just about people who love each other so why not let any consenting adults who want to marry?
any consenting adults.
