It’s Time to Legalize Polygamy

[jaysabi]

To force mosques to have same sex marriages or be forced to loose all tax exemptions?

I don't believe the marriage-equality issue is about forcing religious organisations to conduct marriages which are counter to their inherent bigotry.

AFAIK marriage-equality deals solely with the issue of ensuring that all US States have to conduct and recognise marriages between two people, irrespective of their gender. It is a legal issue of ensuring gay couples can have the same rights in marriage as heterosexual couples.

The law does not concern forcing religious organisations to conduct gay marriages. Unless you know otherwise.

No, this is a correct interpretation as far as anyone can honestly represent. The government can't discriminate because it is the role of government to protect an individual's rights. Religious institutions are free to continue discriminating because they have no onus concerning rights, and it's a mutually voluntary association by the organization and the individual.

[bryant.coleman]

These are the countries which have legalized polygamy as of now (in black). Countries in light blue allow polygamy only for Muslim citizens, while polygamy is a criminal offence in the deep blue nations. In the Middle East, only the countries of Israel, Turkey and Tunisia does not allow polygamy. Polygamy is illegal everywhere in the Americas and the Europe.  :

[Wilikon]

To force mosques to have same sex marriages or be forced to loose all tax exemptions?

I don't believe the marriage-equality issue is about forcing religious organisations to conduct marriages which are counter to their inherent bigotry.

AFAIK marriage-equality deals solely with the issue of ensuring that all US States have to conduct and recognise marriages between two people, irrespective of their gender. It is a legal issue of ensuring gay couples can have the same rights in marriage as heterosexual couples.

The law does not concern forcing religious organisations to conduct gay marriages. Unless you know otherwise.

No, this is a correct interpretation as far as anyone can honestly represent. The government can't discriminate because it is the role of government to protect an individual's rights. Religious institutions are free to continue discriminating because they have no onus concerning rights, and it's a mutually voluntary association by the organization and the individual.

If your 'organization' gets tax exemptions, or any kind of government help while still opposed to ssm, wouldn't it be a violation of the law? Not just churches or mosques but universities with a catholic affiliation for example...


Wasn't polygamy the norm back in the old days... I mean the old old days.
Social evolution seems to tell us polygamy went out, based on structural reason, just like the dinosaurs...


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Discrimination is discrimination. I believe we will see more and more cases like this one in the future.


The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

Robert and Cynthia Gifford, who own and operate Liberty Ridge Farm in Schaghticoke, were ordered by DHR Judge Migdalia Pares and Commissioner Helen Diane Foster to pay $10,000 in fines to the state and an additional $3,000 in damages to the lesbian couple, Jennie McCarthy and Melissa Erwin for “mental pain and suffering.”

Additionally, the Giffords must provide sensitivity training to their staff, and prominently display a poster highlighting state anti-discrimination laws.


https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-couple-fined-13000-for-refusing-to-host-same-sex-wedding-at-their

[Wilikon]

These are the countries which have legalized polygamy as of now (in black). Countries in light blue allow polygamy only for Muslim citizens, while polygamy is a criminal offence in the deep blue nations. In the Middle East, only the countries of Israel, Turkey and Tunisia does not allow polygamy. Polygamy is illegal everywhere in the Americas and the Europe.  :

So in some countries muslims have a different (better, more rights?) status than other citizens of that same country. Interesting...

Too bad that map is so small.

[jaysabi]

To force mosques to have same sex marriages or be forced to loose all tax exemptions?

I don't believe the marriage-equality issue is about forcing religious organisations to conduct marriages which are counter to their inherent bigotry.

AFAIK marriage-equality deals solely with the issue of ensuring that all US States have to conduct and recognise marriages between two people, irrespective of their gender. It is a legal issue of ensuring gay couples can have the same rights in marriage as heterosexual couples.

The law does not concern forcing religious organisations to conduct gay marriages. Unless you know otherwise.

No, this is a correct interpretation as far as anyone can honestly represent. The government can't discriminate because it is the role of government to protect an individual's rights. Religious institutions are free to continue discriminating because they have no onus concerning rights, and it's a mutually voluntary association by the organization and the individual.

If your 'organization' gets tax exemptions, or any kind of government help while still opposed to ssm, wouldn't it be a violation of the law? Not just churches or mosques but universities with a catholic affiliation for example...


Wasn't polygamy the norm back in the old days... I mean the old old days.
Social evolution seems to tell us polygamy went out, based on structural reason, just like the dinosaurs...


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Discrimination is discrimination. I believe we will see more and more cases like this one in the future.


The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

Robert and Cynthia Gifford, who own and operate Liberty Ridge Farm in Schaghticoke, were ordered by DHR Judge Migdalia Pares and Commissioner Helen Diane Foster to pay $10,000 in fines to the state and an additional $3,000 in damages to the lesbian couple, Jennie McCarthy and Melissa Erwin for “mental pain and suffering.”

Additionally, the Giffords must provide sensitivity training to their staff, and prominently display a poster highlighting state anti-discrimination laws.


https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-couple-fined-13000-for-refusing-to-host-same-sex-wedding-at-their

I don't know that it's a violation of the law, why would it be? First, I don't think any religious organization should have a tax exempt status, but nonetheless, I don't know how this has a bearing on the relevant circumstances of the situation. Taking a tax deduction doesn't make you an agent of the government.

The protection of rights is by the government, not individual organizations. I support gay marriage, but I don't support forcing any religious organization to perform a religious ceremony (and I, as an atheist, have no pony in that race. What religious organizations do privately affects me in no way.) Religious marriage and civil marriage are not the same, and this law should only be binding on civil marriage, and governments are the only institution involved in civil marriage.

[Finchy]

Why do people need the blessings of the state for a marriage to be official? Why do people even want to get married in the first place? IF you want a partner have one. If you want multiple partners and they're ok with it have them. Don't see why multiple 'marriage' has to be legalized. Just have a ceremony yourself if you really want.

[Wilikon]

To force mosques to have same sex marriages or be forced to loose all tax exemptions?

I don't believe the marriage-equality issue is about forcing religious organisations to conduct marriages which are counter to their inherent bigotry.

AFAIK marriage-equality deals solely with the issue of ensuring that all US States have to conduct and recognise marriages between two people, irrespective of their gender. It is a legal issue of ensuring gay couples can have the same rights in marriage as heterosexual couples.

The law does not concern forcing religious organisations to conduct gay marriages. Unless you know otherwise.

No, this is a correct interpretation as far as anyone can honestly represent. The government can't discriminate because it is the role of government to protect an individual's rights. Religious institutions are free to continue discriminating because they have no onus concerning rights, and it's a mutually voluntary association by the organization and the individual.

If your 'organization' gets tax exemptions, or any kind of government help while still opposed to ssm, wouldn't it be a violation of the law? Not just churches or mosques but universities with a catholic affiliation for example...


Wasn't polygamy the norm back in the old days... I mean the old old days.
Social evolution seems to tell us polygamy went out, based on structural reason, just like the dinosaurs...


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Discrimination is discrimination. I believe we will see more and more cases like this one in the future.


The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

Robert and Cynthia Gifford, who own and operate Liberty Ridge Farm in Schaghticoke, were ordered by DHR Judge Migdalia Pares and Commissioner Helen Diane Foster to pay $10,000 in fines to the state and an additional $3,000 in damages to the lesbian couple, Jennie McCarthy and Melissa Erwin for “mental pain and suffering.”

Additionally, the Giffords must provide sensitivity training to their staff, and prominently display a poster highlighting state anti-discrimination laws.


https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-couple-fined-13000-for-refusing-to-host-same-sex-wedding-at-their

I don't know that it's a violation of the law, why would it be? First, I don't think any religious organization should have a tax exempt status, but nonetheless, I don't know how this has a bearing on the relevant circumstances of the situation. Taking a tax deduction doesn't make you an agent of the government.

The protection of rights is by the government, not individual organizations. I support gay marriage, but I don't support forcing any religious organization to perform a religious ceremony (and I, as an atheist, have no pony in that race. What religious organizations do privately affects me in no way.) Religious marriage and civil marriage are not the same, and this law should only be binding on civil marriage, and governments are the only institution involved in civil marriage.

Let us see if this will stay true. It is not like lawyers tried that before...

I do not understand why a church should be exempted either... Unless a church does a lot of social work, helps the poor, gives free food, etc... Which most do all the time. None stop.

Government should do stuff like anti personal mines to sell overseas and churches should take care of the souls of those at the receiving ends of those mines...

 

[Beliathon]

A book offering some insight into the inevitable future of human mating:

[Wilikon]

A book offering some insight into the inevitable future of human mating:

Is love = trust = myth = an obsolete concept of possession and control?

[cryptodevil]

The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

This is a different legal issue altogether. That the owners of a business are Catholic bigots doesn't entitle their for-profit commercial enterprise to operate as though their Catholic bigotry over-rides their business obligation not to discriminate against their customers.

The fact that Hobby Lobby managed to twist the law into crow-barring the notion of the "deeply-held beliefs" of its owners into over-riding its obligations to its employees when it came to health insurance claims, should worry you far more than two people of the same gender wanting the state to stop discriminating against them.

Remember the bakery which wanted to pick and choose which customers it was willing to serve? People were quick to post misinformed clap-trap such as, "It's their business who they choose to serve", when the fact is, it isn't. If you run a for-profit business you are required to operate equally and fairly to all potential customers. The right of, say, managers of a Bar serving alcohol to refuse service is something entirely different and they are allowed to refuse service on the grounds that somebody is not fit to be consuming more alcohol.

Trouble is the fungelical loonies like to wrap the whole mess up into one and scream about being persecuted because their religious 'rights' are being 'trampled on'. But its no different to the Puritan settlers who first left England for America, not because they were fleeing persecution but because they were not being allowed to persecute those who did not want to accept their puritan demands. So they went to start a new country where they were free to persecute anybody who wasn't like them.

Which is how we get to the 'Deep South' religious insanity of today.

[jayce]

If your spouse give permission for you to marry again with another woman, I think it's okay. Maybe your first wife can't get pregnant or has a other problem. But if your spouse don't, how can you force her to do that, I mean you will hurt her heart. Whatever government will do about polygamy rules, it just depend on yourself to want it or not. Legalize polygamy doesn't mean government force you to do that.

[cakir]

These are the countries which have legalized polygamy as of now (in black). Countries in light blue allow polygamy only for Muslim citizens, while polygamy is a criminal offence in the deep blue nations. In the Middle East, only the countries of Israel, Turkey and Tunisia does not allow polygamy. Polygamy is illegal everywhere in the Americas and the Europe.  :

It's kinda illegal in Turkey, But I've never heard that someone got punishment because of polygamy.
Islamic beliefs support that.

How it's done in Turkey?
1 wife is legal wife and others' marriage is in front of Allah (Imams makes those weddings).

Obviously Women don't have that right...

[Beliathon]

Is love = trust = myth = an obsolete concept of possession and control?

Jealousy is the myth, compersion is true human nature.

Compersion

-The feeling of joy one has experiencing another's joy, such as in witnessing a toddler's joy and feeling joy in response.
-The feeling of joy associated with seeing a loved one love another; contrasted with jealousy.

[Wilikon]

These are the countries which have legalized polygamy as of now (in black). Countries in light blue allow polygamy only for Muslim citizens, while polygamy is a criminal offence in the deep blue nations. In the Middle East, only the countries of Israel, Turkey and Tunisia does not allow polygamy. Polygamy is illegal everywhere in the Americas and the Europe.  :

It's kinda illegal in Turkey, But I've never heard that someone got punishment because of polygamy.
Islamic beliefs support that.

How it's done in Turkey?
1 wife is legal wife and others' marriage is in front of Allah (Imams makes those weddings).

Obviously Women don't have that right...

No kidding...

[(oYo)]

So looking at one of these scientific facts, no harm in polygamy legalization.

How about this harm I already pointed out?

I believe the reasoning behind keeping polygamy illegal is less to do with cultural distaste and more to do with the fact that polygamous marriages are generally driven by dysfunctional responses to human relationship power balances.

We are not talking about a group marriage of equals, we are talking about multiple people marrying a single person. That is inherently an unbalanced relationship open to abuses and usually the result of those involved having psychological issues which compel them to seek out a relationship which cannot possibly be consistent with an equal balance of power.

You see, coming up with vague notions of elements of polygamy which might not be harmful is not exactly useful in the presence of a reasoned fact of how polygamy is harmful.

I am in a monogamous relationship, but am polyamorous at heart. (Polyamory is the practice, desire, or acceptance of intimate relationships that are not exclusive with respect to other sexual or intimate relationships, with knowledge and consent of everyone involved.)



Polygamy or polyandry may sometimes be the consequence of there not being enough suitable mates of one sex in an otherwise polyamorous relationship and therefore I feel it is perfectly fine under those circumstances. Granted most people are too selfish, immature or small minded for a polyamorous relationship, but I see no reason why one person of one sex cannot be good for a group of people of the other sex when everyone is respectful and loving, especially if other potential mates are all proven less desirable or worse, assholes. While they are not equal in number, I think it's unfair to assume that they must also be unequal in love and respect or even power.

I believe the dysfunction you speak of is not a result of polygamy. It is when twisted individuals prey on weaker ones. This happens in monogamous marriage as well. It happens in every aspect of humanity, including economics and politics.

Is love = trust = myth = an obsolete concept of possession and control?

Jealousy is the myth, compersion is true human nature.

Compersion

-The feeling of joy one has experiencing another's joy, such as in witnessing a toddler's joy and feeling joy in response.
-The feeling of joy associated with seeing a loved one love another; contrasted with jealousy.

Emboldened is the essence of polyamory. I only wish more people were like this. The world would certainly be a better place.

<edit> I think I should add, although I've stated I'm in a monogamous relationship, my wife and I both feel our relationship need not be exclusive and is "open", but neither of us have found anyone suitable nor are we actively searching for someone else. We are perfectly happy being "monogamous", but not opposed to sharing either.

[Beliathon]

I am in a monogamous relationship, but am polyamorous at heart.

Same here. Paying rent in my city costs too much of my time to sustain multiple very intimate relationships, to say nothing of the rarity of compatible +young + mutually attractive +poly folk.

Emboldened is the essence of polyamory. I only wish more people were like this.

Everyone will be like this after a few more decades, the walls have already begun crumbling down for all the myths of religion, monogamy is simply the last one to go. 

[Wilikon]

I am in a monogamous relationship, but am polyamorous at heart.

Same here. Paying rent in my city costs too much of my time to sustain multiple very intimate relationships, to say nothing of the rarity of compatible +young + mutually attractive +poly folk.

Emboldened is the essence of polyamory. I only wish more people were like this.

Everyone will be like this after a few more decades, the walls have already begun crumbling down for all the myths of religion, monogamy is simply the last one to go. 

As if this has never happened before throughout history... The walls crumble... Then it is rebuilt, then it goes down again... Over and over again. Nothing new.

[masterzino]

I think if a fair amount of muslims start petitioning for it's legalization you'll see white liberals supporting the cause. If mormons want it however...

[Wilikon]

I think if a fair amount of muslims start petitioning for it's legalization you'll see white liberals supporting the cause. If mormons want it however...

So true

 

[BillyBobZorton]

I don't believe in a polygamous marriage. I mean, the point of marriage is being with an unique person.. I just never got my head around people having 4 wifes. If you want to fuck around, why not just stay single? We are in 2015, there's nothing wrong with not marring and staying single.
Also, I don't see who in hell is going to be able to maintain 4 wifes, assuming not all of them work. And if they do work, I can imagine the mess trying to divide each salary to pay bills and expenses, let alone the confused kids having "4 moms"..