Discussion in 'FLDS Raids and Related Items' started by RainbowsAndGumdrops, Jul 9, 2008.
Would you support a law that legalizes polygamy? Consenting adults of course.
No. I believe marriage is between One man and One woman.
Polygamy annoys me because its always the men with multiple wives and never the wives with multiple husbands, plus the men would never allow it.
I voted yes. I believe there is scriptural support for polygamy throughout the ages. I think it is illegal and therefore should not be practiced. If it were legal, I wouldn't have an issue with it, given the adults are consenting.
I don't think that polygamy is about power and control.
I also think that if polygamy is lived well, everyone could be happy in that environment.
had to vote yes even though it goes against my personal feelings.
It is that whole Pandora's box thing.
I personally believe marriage is best defined as one man one woman. I think we have made a mockery of that in this country and it no longer means that at all. People either have affairs while married, or get divorced and remarry multiple times.
Then there are people that are gay. They point to the sham that heterosexuals have made of marriage as well as their own (some of the time) stable relationships and ask for the legal protections and advantages that go along with marriage be extended to them.
If we legalize two men getting married or two women getting married how can we possibly say no if a man wants to marry his several women all at once? Especially when the women agree?
Another thought, poygamy was allowed for by God and I dont think he would have allowed for it, if it were inherently harmful to humans.
In short, I think we have lost the "right" to tell men and women that marriage can only consist of two people at one time, just as we are losing the right to tell people of the same sex they cant marry.
I feel the government does have a clear and distinct right to not have to fund polygamy by paying out for the children and extra wives it creates.
Well I sure managed to mess my last post up! I have no idea why my blue writing didnt work or why it looks like that or even how to fix it. I just tried about ten times!!!:waitasec::waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:
I voted no, but after reading your post, maybe I am not so sure.
Why not just let them call it "spiritual marriages"? Why does it have to be recognized by the government? It would be a nightmare with medical insurance, taxes, etc etc.
Easily. One (gay marriage) has nothing to do with the other-polygamy. That's why bigamy laws exist. Even if the women are adults, they are being subservient, and it throws off the balance for other males and creates welfare situations.
I actually had to think quite a while about the tax issue. I came to the following conclusion. They would all be one household. As such all incomes combine for the household income and the dependants are all claimed as a group. If however, they choose married filing seperately, those that file seperately would have to have their income and dependants not counted as part of the group.
Insurance... I didn't think about that. Hmmm. If large families paying only 1 family insurance premium took over the world our premiums would skyrocket. I think the number of polygamists would be so minimal that the impact to others would be minimal.
Glow's post changed my opinion from yes to "NO". I feel that marriage should be between a man and a woman. That right is only maintained as long as we keep it. While I wouldn't have much problem with consenting adults entering a polygamous marriage relationship, I would have a problem loosing the right to say that marriage is between one man and one woman. I think that is a right worth standing up for. When that right is lost it cannot be restored.
I change my vote to "NO"
I have to say that I am a bit confused by this post. I agree that gay marriage and polygamy are not related - except that they change the marriage laws in the us and redefine what a marriage is. Legalizing polygamy would change bigamy laws just as gay marriage would change the laws on who can get married. I think that is the point GLOW was making.
The issue of subservience - I don't think women have to be any more subserviant in a polygamous relationship than in any other. This question is if everyone has free choice in the situation and is consenting. I do see subserviance as a problem in the relationships currently.
Now for the end of your post - the whole reason I replied. I don't think that polygamy is going to be so popular that it throws off the entire male female balance in the world. It seems to me there are more gays and lesbians that would throw off the balance (more gays than lesbians or more lesbians than gays etc). Polygamy throwing off the balance only seems to be a problem in a closed society (such as the FLDS ranches).
Ok, I just talked my way through my logic and talked myself out of all my points that I wanted to make...:waitasec:
Absolutely not. I look around and if I see polygamy, in general I see women with fewer rights than they should have, arranged marriages, talk of freedom with precious little to actually be had. How can a family send 40 kids to college? How can a man know and cherrish 5 women and 28 children? How can a man be a good husband if he doesn't even know his chilren's names or who their mothers are...or recognize his kids on the street. I see women barefoot and preggers applying for welfare while men with stockpiles of heavy equipment work 12 year old kids on construction crews. Invariably, men seem to dominate, control, boast a hotline to God and, way too often, way too young brides seem to get thrown into that equation.
For me, marriage should be a relationship between two people---friends, lovers, companions, mating for life, equals in a primary, exclusive relationship, throwing their lot in together for life (and/or eternity), pulling in double harness, leaving their mothers and fathers and cleaving to each other, together forming a supportive unit which underpines the family and the society. In our day and time, it's the structure that can potentially offer stability and security to the greatest degree for greatest number of people and the one that creates the least strife, poverty and misery while affording the greatest potential for human freedom and for glorifying God according to new testament principles.
Here, hear! Precisely.
So funny that your original posts had me considering changing my vote to "yes".
I love to read different opinions on this.
I think my final answer is NO. Marriage is for one man and one woman. If your religion calls for something different, then just go ahead and have a hippie commune lifestyle, and be sure to legally prepare for your death with a will, and make enough money to pay for health insurance for all of you wives. Unless they work, of course.
Nope. If a person is not going to be faithful to one person, what is the point of marriage?
Tough question- I think if we are going to pass laws support gay marriage, then we have to consider passing laws that support plural marriage in the cases of consenting adults. Plural marriage is hardly exclusive to the FLDS- there are tons of websites dedicated to those seeking sister-wives and a huge chuck of those folks are not affiliated with any off-shoots of the LDS church. If men can legally marry men and women can legally marry women, they what is the harm of men marrying multiple women who are at the age of consent? I am not saying I support this at all, just playing devil's advocate here.
As far as the fear that it will create more welfare issues because of men having children with multiple wives-- HELLO!! We have this problem already- men have children with multiple women (often at the same time) every day in this country!! Don't y'all watch Maury and Jerry? The difference is these men are not married to all (or any) the baby-mamas, which IMO, is actually more of a burden on the welfare system in this country. At least if the men are legally bound to these women and children, it will be easier to go after them to support their offspring.
Would I support it??? --- you mean vote FOR a law that legalizes it - probably not.
Do I care if they pass a law that allows it - no, not really.
Isn't it already "illegal?"
Obviously, that makes no real difference to people who choose to live that lifestyle. So whether the govt. officially sanctions it or not is rather beside the point.
My ONLY problem concerning this is that some people might be forced into the lifestyle against their free will or because they are 'brainwashed' & actually believe they are exercising free will.
Until the govt. is prepared to pass laws that actually PREVENT adults from living together unless they have an officially recognized marriage certificate, what are they actually preventing?! lol Nothing!
We shouldn't be fooled into believing we can judge the 'sanctity of our own marriages' against the lives of other people & their personal relationships. If someone else lifestyle choices are affecting YOUR marriage/family.... it's probably a real good time to examine your own life.
If polygamy becomes legal, will employers have to insure all the spouses?
It would make it a lot harder to find a job, if so.
But I suppose that's one of the little things you have to deal with when you have multiple wives & a million children. lol