Marriage Poll

[ponderingturtle]

Works?

You are a frightening individual.

Sure, it has existed for centuries, just like all kinds of slavery, that means it works. Why should looking at the dynamics of a system be a moral judgement?

You are a strange individual who seems to enjoy denying many unpleasant aspects of the world.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Sure, it has existed for centuries, just like all kinds of slavery, that means it works. Why should looking at the dynamics of a system be a moral judgement?

You are a strange individual who seems to enjoy denying many unpleasant aspects of the world.

I'm frankly insulted that while I'm contemplating a type of marriage intended to secure the future of children, you're comparing it to kidnapping and rape.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm frankly insulted that while I'm contemplating a type of marriage intended to secure the future of children, you're comparing it to kidnapping and rape.

It is just that the latter is what has any actual real world examples to cite.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

It is just that the latter is what has any actual real world examples to cite.

And mentioning it is in no way relevant to the discussion of whether a line marriage could work. Lack of precedent isn't a convincing argument for why it cannot.

 

[ponderingturtle]

And mentioning it is in no way relevant to the discussion of whether a line marriage could work. Lack of precedent isn't a convincing argument for why it cannot.

But the apparent lack of anyone wanting it unlike other forms of poly marriage does.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

But the apparent lack of anyone wanting it unlike other forms of poly marriage does.

Lack of precedent is not an arguement with regards to whether or not it can work. You're just trying to tarnish the idea by comparing it to kidnapping and rape.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Lack of precedent is not an arguement with regards to whether or not it can work. You're just trying to tarnish the idea by comparing it to kidnapping and rape.

It is not a lack of precident, it is a lack of a desire to bring about such a system.

You are advocating a system that you can not demonstrate anyone other than you wants.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

It is not a lack of precident, it is a lack of a desire to bring about such a system.

You are advocating a system that you can not demonstrate anyone other than you wants.

Plenty of people practice group marriages, and group marriages vary wildly in description. Now, I'll have to post more later, as the work server blocks search terms like "polygamy" and "group marriage."

 

[ponderingturtle]

Plenty of people practice group marriages, and group marriages vary wildly in description. Now, I'll have to post more later, as the work server blocks search terms like "polygamy" and "group marriage."

And what of those are organized in the line model?

I have readily admitted that people practice group marriage, in spite of it not being legally recognized. That was an argument I used to demonstrate that there is no desire for a line marriage, as it would be being actively practiced if people wanted it.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

And what of those are organized in the line model?

I have readily admitted that people practice group marriage, in spite of it not being legally recognized. That was an argument I used to demonstrate that there is no desire for a line marriage, as it would be being actively practiced if people wanted it.

And I retorted that a line marriage requires legal recognition first because it involves group property, and group custody of children, and cannot exist on the fringe.

 

[ponderingturtle]

And I retorted that a line marriage requires legal recognition first because it involves group property, and group custody of children, and cannot exist on the fringe.

Then show the desire. You now claim current polyamourus groups might well practice line marriage. Fine show me such relationships.

ID basically put up or shut up, show that there is are groups of people that would form line marriages if legally able to, or admit that you can not find anyone other than you who advocates such an arrangement.

You realize you consecutively claim this

Plenty of people practice group marriages, and group marriages vary wildly in description. Now, I'll have to post more later, as the work server blocks search terms like "polygamy" and "group marriage."

and that you need legal recognition for any line marriage to happen? You are flailing about with contradictory claims.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Then show the desire. You now claim current polyamourus groups might well practice line marriage. Fine show me such relationships.

ID basically put up or shut up, show that there is are groups of people that would form line marriages if legally able to, or admit that you can not find anyone other than you who advocates such an arrangement.

You realize you consecutively claim this

and that you need legal recognition for any line marriage to happen? You are flailing about with contradictory claims.

What, now that you've satisfied yourself by comparing a consensual realtionship between adults to kidnapping and rape, you insist on putting the cart before the horse and are asking me to demonstrate that line marriages exist when the legal climate cannot permit them?

I'm going to repeat myself for the benefit of your limited literacy.

Line marriages, in principle, differ from other polygamous marriages by being perpetual with the intention of accumulating captial and providing the welfare of the children. Without a legal climate to recognize precisely that sort of marriage, they wouldn't exist.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What, now that you've satisfied yourself by comparing a consensual realtionship between adults to kidnapping and rape, you insist on putting the cart before the horse and are asking me to demonstrate that line marriages exist when the legal climate cannot permit them?

Kidnapping and rape are a traditional basis for marriage. There is far more evidence about how they work when implemented, than line marriage.

I'm going to repeat myself for the benefit of your limited literacy.

Line marriages, in principle, differ from other polygamous marriages by being perpetual with the intention of accumulating captial and providing the welfare of the children. Without a legal climate to recognize precisely that sort of marriage, they wouldn't exist.

Put up or shut up, show that there is any interest in such a social organization? Your only support is FICTION. So why are you thinking that fiction should have any merit? I see no more reason to believe what Heinlein presents as marriage than the bible or the Gor books. Fiction is fiction.

You are once again mixing claims. Sure there are many people engaging in polyamourus relationships, please show which of them fit the line marriage concept. If you can't then that is an entirely irrelevant point and you are derailing your own argument.

As you initially pointed out, you could well legally set up a corporation that would fulfill the central tenants of a line marriage so there is not the massive legal obstacles that you seem to think there are. If people wanted this they would be living in such a relationship, so clearly no one wants it, at least no real group of people.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Kidnapping and rape are a traditional basis for marriage. There is far more evidence about how they work when implemented, than line marriage.

On what planet do rape and kidnapping "work" in a marriage? What sick and demented planet are you from?

Perhaps you are unaware that line marriages ARE A PROPOSED IDEA!

Why are you asking for evidence that line marriages currently exist when I speculated on whether they might work?

 

[bigbossmatt]

I voted that "any number of adults should be allowed to marry, regardless of gender" even though I personally would want to be in a monogymist relationship with a woman (and I am a male).

I want to be satisfied by one loving partner, and to have them reciprocate my love to me alone; not any one else. I can however imagine possible places and people who would choose a consensual polygamist lifestyle. I can't see any theoretical reasons for polygamy being immoral, wrong, or in any way evil.

Regarding hetero/homosexuality. Neither is evil, or wrong, I am for it all. Homosexual love if real and they should be allowed to practice whatever unions that they desire.

The law should not dictate what people should and should not feel. If the urges are real (whether for love from one other, many others, of the same or different sex), then these urges should not (by proxy) been condemned by the law as being 'wrong' because a particular law has yet to be refined to the point of being -what I would say is sufficiently- liberal.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Ok, I'll have to look up materials this weekend. I've too much to finish up this week.

Pondering, you want me to find evidence that people are presently in line marriages, for some unfathomable reason, and you contend that kidnapping and rape "work" as a basis for marriage, why? What does either point have to do with speculation about how a line marriage might work?

 

[ponderingturtle]

On what planet do rape and kidnapping "work" in a marriage? What sick and demented planet are you from?

Perhaps you are unaware that line marriages ARE A PROPOSED IDEA!

Why are you asking for evidence that line marriages currently exist when I speculated on whether they might work?

And the point is that you seem to be unable to show that anyone other than you wants such a thing.

There would need to be many laws rewritten to satisfy one person who could not even take advantage of the law anyway as it is a group endeavor.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Ok, I'll have to look up materials this weekend. I've too much to finish up this week.

Pondering, you want me to find evidence that people are presently in line marriages, for some unfathomable reason, and you contend that kidnapping and rape "work" as a basis for marriage, why? What does either point have to do with speculation about how a line marriage might work?

I said that we know how they work. It is sort of like saying that we know how slavery works from historic records and modern examples. It does not mean it is moral or perferable.

I think if you are argueing in favor of a change in laws you should be able to demonstrate that someone would actual take up a line marriage.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I said that we know how they work. It is sort of like saying that we know how slavery works from historic records and modern examples. It does not mean it is moral or perferable.

I think if you are argueing in favor of a change in laws you should be able to demonstrate that someone would actual take up a line marriage.

I'm sorry, you must not have read my second post in this thread.

I've often wondered how effectively a line marriage can be created when the marriage consists of a not-for-profit corporation the various spouses join, with "shared" property being the property of the corporation, and decisions on that property being made by vote. The financial assets of the marriage persist in perpetuity, and can support for children much more reliably across generations than inheritance.

But, running a marriage like a democracy seems like a bad idea. Plus, hospitials often have that annoying policy of only allowing "family" in to see a patient, under an archaic definition of family.

Nothing about that proposal requires changing the laws. It's a way to gain most of the benefits of the line marriage idea, shared property between more than tow people, capital accumulated in perpetuity, without changing present laws.

 

[Amapola]

A couple of people have mentioned they don't see any problem with polygamy as long as the laws could be worked out...... I lived among polygamists in UT years ago and at present, there is a problem with the system. The problem is, these many women married to the single man are all on welfare. That single man does not make enough money at his job to support all the households and children. We had one neighbor that had 15 kids.... imagine paying for anything for 15 kids! So at the present, polygamists are a real drain on society as the system is not self-supporting.

Of course there are other people on welfare too...... but in a polygamist society it is the norm for one of the wives to be the listed "legal" wife, and for all the rest to be on welfare. This is not the norm in a marriage between two people.

There may be some way to solve this issue with laws, but at present, that's how polygamy works in the USA. (And in Canada, too, from what I was told.)

Therefore, option #2 gets my vote.