Time to Allow Polyamorous Marraiges

Skeptic said:
(Shrug)

Told you so.

Naturally, the pro-gay marriage folks first told me I'm crazy for saying gay marriage could possibly lead to this... and now they will tell me it's the most natural thing in the world and that I'm crazy for saying there's anything wrong with this.

(We've seen the same thing before, when opposition to civil unions fearing it would lead to gay marriage was first denigrated as "paranoid" and later, when just that happened, the "paranoid" conclusion was taken up as the most natural thing in the world.)

I wish they'd make up their mind.

By the way, the "slippery slope" argument is legitimate if the slope is in fact slippery. If recognizing gay marriage is likely to lead to recognizing polygamy, then it's simply a valid argument; it is only a "slippery slope" fallacy if recognition of gay marriage is not likely to lead to this. I tend to think the slope is slippery in this case. Others disagree. But that is a matter of fact. Merely making a slippery slope argument is not in itself a logical fallacy.

It is true that it is a fallacy to claim that if society recognizes gay marriage then it must ipso facto recognize polygamy. It does not logically follow that one leads to the other. It only might, under certain conditions, practically do so, which is the "slippery slope" claim. But these are two different claims. I agree with the latter, but am not claiming the former.

However, if gay marriage is recognizes, not due to the legistlature following public opinion, but because the courts decide there is a "constitutional right" to gay marriage, in that case it logically follows as a necessity, not merely as a possiblity, that the states must also recognize polygamy: if sex is no barrier to a "constitutional right" to marriage, neither is number.
Click to expand...

Cause/effect FAIL.

Tell me, Mr. "I can read Hebrew but nonetheless am ignoring the history of polygamy in Western civilization" how does gay marriage lead to a polygamous marriages?
 
And for the life of me I still can't tell how a discussion about polyamorous marriage turns into a discussion about polygamous marriage.
 
arthwollipot said:
And for the life of me I still can't tell how a discussion about polyamorous marriage turns into a discussion about polygamous marriage.
Click to expand...

Well they do go together if he polyamory takes the form of multiple people wanting to be in a single marriage. If it is the form of primary vs secondary relationships then current marriage laws can recognize the primary relationship.

Polygamy is when ever you have more than two people in a marriage or one person having more than one marriage.

So I am lost about the distinction you are trying to draw here.
 
arthwollipot said:
I don't understand why people keep using the word "polygamy" when they mean "polyamory".
Click to expand...

Because when talking about marriage the term is polygamy, when talking about love the term is polyamory. Polyamorous marriage except for situations where there would only be one legally recognized primary partner is polygamy.

So as this thread is about marriage and not love, it is about polygamy and not polyamory.
 
arthwollipot said:
I don't understand why people keep using the word "polygamy" when they mean "polyamory".
Click to expand...

Because one is an umbrella term that includes the other within it, and this leads to a certain amount of confusion.

Polyamory means "many loves." It might include marriage, and/or it might not.

Polygamy means "many marriages." It is a kind of subset of polyamory, is included within it. If multiple wives, it's polygyny, and if multiple husbands, it's polyandry.

If you were in a marriage-type relationship with multiple husbands and wives (meaning you had, for instance, two husbands and two wives, all married to you and to each other), it might be called polyamorous polygamy, but that might be a misnomer. I think it should just be called polygamy, myself.
 
There's something I don't see in all this discussion about polygamy. (As noted before, the original title was about "polyamorous marriages", which is polygamy.)

I understand why people feel compelled to participate in polyamorous relationships, or if not compelled, I can see why they would desire it. I'm all on board with why people think they ought to have a legal right to do so. I agree. Yeah, rights.

However, among people who want actual polygamy, those people want something more. They want a certificate that acknowledges their polyamorous relationships, and they want at least some subset of rights and privileges associated with marriage as a consequence of getting that certificate.

I'm not dead set against that sort of thing, and as I noted early on, I think it will happen within 20 years, but I have to ask a simple question. As a citizen of the state which polygamy advocates wish to grant them that certificate, why would I want to do so? What's in it for me?
 
Meadmaker said:
I'm not dead set against that sort of thing, and as I noted early on, I think it will happen within 20 years, but I have to ask a simple question. As a citizen of the state which polygamy advocates wish to grant them that certificate, why would I want to do so? What's in it for me?
Click to expand...

As a WASP male should I view the past 150 years of civil rights as something that happened to other people, what was in it for me?

Giving minorities and women voting rights diluted my voting power, so what is in it for me to support these things?
 
Meadmaker said:
There's something I don't see in all this discussion about polygamy. (As noted before, the original title was about "polyamorous marriages", which is polygamy.)

I understand why people feel compelled to participate in polyamorous relationships, or if not compelled, I can see why they would desire it. I'm all on board with why people think they ought to have a legal right to do so. I agree. Yeah, rights.

However, among people who want actual polygamy, those people want something more. They want a certificate that acknowledges their polyamorous relationships, and they want at least some subset of rights and privileges associated with marriage as a consequence of getting that certificate.

I'm not dead set against that sort of thing, and as I noted early on, I think it will happen within 20 years, but I have to ask a simple question. As a citizen of the state which polygamy advocates wish to grant them that certificate, why would I want to do so? What's in it for me?
Click to expand...


Supporting it means you can pupate, and transform from a selfish, priviliged elitist with a huge sense of entitlement into a beautiful almost human being.
 
ponderingturtle said:
As a WASP male should I view the past 150 years of civil rights as something that happened to other people, what was in it for me?

Giving minorities and women voting rights diluted my voting power, so what is in it for me to support these things?
Click to expand...

Those are questions you'll have to answer for yourself. If that were the topic, I am certain I could do so, but we aren't discussing whether or not women should vote.

As a member of society, I could cite benefits to me from all of the things you mentioned. Can anyone do the same for polygamy? Will we have a better world if a judge signs that certificate that says Jim, and Lisa, and Julie are married, and entitled to whatever it is that married people are entitled to?
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Those are questions you'll have to answer for yourself. If that were the topic, I am certain I could do so, but we aren't discussing whether or not women should vote.

As a member of society, I could cite benefits to me from all of the things you mentioned. Can anyone do the same for polygamy? Will we have a better world if a judge signs that certificate that says Jim, and Lisa, and Julie are married?
Click to expand...

How do you dsirectl benefit from the fact that women and blacks can vote? How do you directly benefit from protective child labor laws?

What kind of person are you that you won't support anything which does not directly benefit you in some tangible way?
 
Meadmaker said:
Those are questions you'll have to answer for yourself. If that were the topic, I am certain I could do so, but we aren't discussing whether or not women should vote.
Click to expand...

So how do you benefit from those laws? The point is that when talking about minority rights asking "what do I get out of it" is a very poor argument.
As a member of society, I could cite benefits to me from all of the things you mentioned. Can anyone do the same for polygamy? Will we have a better world if a judge signs that certificate that says Jim, and Lisa, and Julie are married, and entitled to whatever it is that married people are entitled to?
Click to expand...

Then do so.
 
ponderingturtle said:
So how do you benefit from those laws? The point is that when talking about minority rights asking "what do I get out of it" is a very poor argument.


Then do so.
Click to expand...
Wjen people ask questions, you seem to love to respond with, "Oh, yeah? What about this other question?" I don't want to change the subject.

Some people have advocated polygamy. I understand why some people want it, but why should they get it? For people who are advocating changing laws, I think it is incumbent upon those advocates to present a case why it ought to be done.

Keep in mind that we are not discussing multiple relationships, but multiple marriages. In the modern United States, and many other countries, it is well established law that you can live with and sleep with whoever you wish, so long as everyone is a consenting adult and not a close relative. Marriage, however, is something else entirely. Marriage is a legal status recognized by the state. Surely, there must be some benefit to society to creating this legal status.

I have followed this thread and heard a lot of discussion that, when stripped away of all the fluff, come down to "I want!" As a liberal, I'm willing to go quite a long way down that road. If you want to have sex in an ongoing relationship with multiple partners, go for it. It's nice work if you can get it.

However, polygamy advocates want more than that. They want the state to do something. I'm always amused when people demanding marriage rights use rhetorical phrases similar to, "I want the government to stop telling me what to do." It's amusing because, by demanding marriage, they are demanding exactly the opposite. A polygamy advocate is demanding that the government get involved in his personal relationships.

So, if there is a polygamy advocate who cares to take up the challenge, why do you want the government to get deeply involved in personal relationships among multiple partners? What form should that involvement take? And, most importantly, what will be the benefit to society if the government gets involved in those relationships?
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
As a citizen of the state which polygamy advocates wish to grant them that certificate, why would I want to do so? What's in it for me?
Click to expand...
Well, what would allowing gay marriage give you?

Unless you are poly, then you gain or lose nothing from allowing poly marriages. Just like you gain or lose nothing from allowing gay marriage.

Oh, and thanks for clearly defining what you all mean by "polygamy". It wasn't what I thought it was. I apologise for the misunderstanding.
 
arthwollipot said:
Well, what would allowing gay marriage give you?

Unless you are poly, then you gain or lose nothing from allowing poly marriages. Just like you gain or lose nothing from allowing gay marriage.
Click to expand...

A note here, this would depend on the form that the laws get written and rewritten to create polygamy.
 
Meadmaker said:
Wjen people ask questions, you seem to love to respond with, "Oh, yeah? What about this other question?" I don't want to change the subject.
Click to expand...

No the point is that the argument "what is in it for me?" is sociopathic and immoral.
Some people have advocated polygamy. I understand why some people want it, but why should they get it? For people who are advocating changing laws, I think it is incumbent upon those advocates to present a case why it ought to be done.
Click to expand...

As you reject fairness, and refuse to have any personal empathy for their situation I don't see the point in continueing this debate/
 
arthwollipot said:
Well, what would allowing gay marriage give you?

Unless you are poly, then you gain or lose nothing from allowing poly marriages. Just like you gain or lose nothing from allowing gay marriage.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I believe that I do, in fact, gain something from my neighbor's marriage.

If gay marriage were the topic of this thread, I might be somewhat inclined to try and answer the question. However, it isn't the topic of the thread, Even more importantly, doing so would distract from my point.

My point is that social constructs such as marriage do, in fact, impact society, and not just the individuals who specifically participate in those constructs. I believe that single people are affected by the existence of civil marriage. The most obvious single people who are affected by the existence of civil marriage are the children of married people, but I think the effects are much wider.

So, if you are so inclined to answer, why do you want the government sticking its nose into polyamorous relationships? That is, after all, what you are asking for if you want polygamy. You want a certificate, and the rights, priviliges, and obligations imposed by that certificate. What benefit is there to society?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom