Homestar Runner Wiki Forum
http://forum.hrwiki.org/

polygamy
http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=787		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  soce,the elemental wizard [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:11 pm ]
Post subject:  polygamy
Thoughts?? It seemed like some people wanted to discuss this in the same-sex marriage thread, so.. let them out now! In case you missed my original statement on the matter..

Quote:
Polygamy presents a whole new set of issues, because there are more than two people. These issues can be worked out in time, but there are just so many different cases of who is the leader, who are the main people and who are the add-ons, does everybody know that others are involved in the relationship and such.. it just takes more work to figure out each individual case.

A certain form of polygamy can arise between couples when a male same-sex couple wants to have kids, so one of them impregnates a woman from a female same-sex couple. Maybe the other male has a child from the other female later on. It's more effort and more confusing, but it can all work out and be fine.


.. But I'm sure y'all can do better than that :bubs:

--socetew :20x6:
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Bah, you can't mention something on these forums without spinning off a new discussion about it :P

I think polyamory, polygamy, etc. are fine so long as all the partners consent and can get along. The relationships have to be open and understanding, which is what makes this, in my view, different from "adultery", which would be sneaking around and [BLEEP]ing somebody else behind your lover's back.

- Kef
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
While I'ma little skeptical of your poll options, I have an opinion about this. Polygamy shouldn't be illegal. There are only two arguments against polygamy. The first is a religious one. We've already discussed why making laws based a particular religiou beliefs is stupid, particularly in a country where the Constitution specifically prohibits it, so we'll skip that bit. The second argument is that it's somehow inherently societally harmful. Of course, that's bunk. In order for that argument to be valid, you'd have to successfully argue that it's always harmful to the parties involved (and related parties), or at least usually harmful. And of course, it's not. An informed, consenting polygamous relationship is neither inherintly nor practically more harmful (directly or indirectly) to the participants than a monogamous relationship, and we've seen what some monogamous relationships are like. Nor is it inherently or practically more harmful to related parties, e.g. children, and no study has ever found that it's so.

Nor is monogamy more "natural" than polygamy, in case anybody thought that would be a keen direction to take this in.
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
I could also point to many passages in the Bible describing polygamous relationships. Making such an argument even on religious grounds is a little silly in many cases.
Author:  AgentSeethroo [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
I have to point out that this was all during Old Testament times, and the main purpose was to expand Isreal, so I really don't think that works here.
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Right, the key word being little silly. But can you point out how things have changed since then in that matter? (I admit I never really researched this topic before.)

- Kef
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
My opinion is that this one of those things that God can command us to engage in, or not to engage in, depending on the circumstances. Currently, I believe that he has commanded us not to engage in this. However, in times past he commanded his people to follow this (or at least permitted it.) The times when it is sinful (again this is a religious point of view, having no bearing on whether the govt should allow it or not) is when someone decides to practice it during a time that God has forbidden it.

I guess that makes my answer.... both?
Author:  soce,the elemental wizard [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
I definitely agree that while polygamy can be good, adultery is definitely bad. For polygamy to work, everyone has to be on the same page. And polygamy won't work for all people. Many people want to have their mate to themselves and not share. That's fine.

So, if a person wants to be polygamous, than that person cannot get involved with a monogamous-seeking person.. that will cause trouble.
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
socetew wrote:
So, if a person wants to be polygamous, than that person cannot get involved with a monogamous-seeking person.. that will cause trouble.


Well that seems fairly obvious. But it's still not a good argument for outlawing the practice. Deceit is not inherent to polygamy any more than it is to monogamy.
Author:  AgentSeethroo [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
racerx_is_alive wrote:
My opinion is that this one of those things that God can command us to engage in, or not to engage in, depending on the circumstances. Currently, I believe that he has commanded us not to engage in this. However, in times past he commanded his people to follow this (or at least permitted it.) The times when it is sinful (again this is a religious point of view, having no bearing on whether the govt should allow it or not) is when someone decides to practice it during a time that God has forbidden it.

I guess that makes my answer.... both?


I think that's a cop-out answer. I'm currently looking up scriptural evidence that polygamy is a no-no.

I personally believe that the proper intimacy can only be between two people. A man and woman. Let's not get into a homosexuality debate here...I'm just making my polygamy point.

I think that there is a certain intimacy that comes between a couple, a spiritual bond that makes the two people one. To bring more people into that makes that bold mean less, and it makes it less strong. I just don't think it could work out in the long run.

Sure, you might have fun for a while, but someone's gonna end up getting hurt very deeply.
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
I personally believe that the proper intimacy can only be between two people. A man and woman. Let's not get into a homosexuality debate here...I'm just making my polygamy point.


Then why qualify your statement with "a man and a woman" in the first place? :P
Author:  Upsilon [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Kef pretty much summed up my attitude towards polygamy in his first post. If there's no deceit involved, it's okay.

AgentTransparent: I don't see how anyone in a polygamous relationship will be very deeply hurt, as long as everyone is open about it and no one minds. What is there to be hurt by?
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
I think that there is a certain intimacy that comes between a couple, a spiritual bond that makes the two people one. To bring more people into that makes that bold mean less, and it makes it less strong. I just don't think it could work out in the long run.


Except that's not true in practice. There are thousands of polygamous, er, family units (what's the polygamous word for "couple"?) in the U.S., and probably millions worldwide, that are far more successful than many monogamous couples.

The only reason that polygamy "causes problems" in relationships is because of the irrational taboo concerning it. It's a self-perpetuating taboo. If Western society didn't have a patriarchal monogamous my-spouse-is-my-property history, then these problems wouldn't exist.

At the heart of any trouble that polygamy "causes" is jealousy and jealousy alone, which is not inherent to interpersonal relationships; rather it is disease of society produced over the past few millennia. A mature society (and ours is clearly not) which can rid itself of jealousy as a universal (jealousy on a personal psychological level will always exist, barring drug-based treatments) could harbor polygamy just as readily as monogamy, and it's my hope that some day we'll grow into a society like that (certainly it won't happen in my lifetime).

And you're right, the religious argument is a silly one no matter what: for the last time, racerx, we do not make laws in this country based on religious beliefs.
Author:  AgentSeethroo [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Upsilon wrote:
Kef pretty much summed up my attitude towards polygamy in his first post. If there's no deceit involved, it's okay.

AgentTransparent: I don't see how anyone in a polygamous relationship will be very deeply hurt, as long as everyone is open about it and no one minds. What is there to be hurt by?


Lemme answer your question with a question.

Have you ever been in a completely committed relationship? Lived with a woman for any extended period of time? If you have then surely you'll understand the following:

Men and women are by nature possessive. We have something that we have and it's ours and we want it and don't wanna share it and it's ours and no one else's.

It's not in our nature to share love. Look even in the Old Testament. Yeah, polygamy was present, but there was resentment from the men's concubines, or other wives.
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
racerx_is_alive wrote:
My opinion is that this one of those things that God can command us to engage in, or not to engage in, depending on the circumstances. Currently, I believe that he has commanded us not to engage in this. However, in times past he commanded his people to follow this (or at least permitted it.) The times when it is sinful (again this is a religious point of view, having no bearing on whether the govt should allow it or not) is when someone decides to practice it during a time that God has forbidden it.

I guess that makes my answer.... both?


I think that's a cop-out answer. I'm currently looking up scriptural evidence that polygamy is a no-no.

I personally believe that the proper intimacy can only be between two people. A man and woman. Let's not get into a homosexuality debate here...I'm just making my polygamy point.

I think that there is a certain intimacy that comes between a couple, a spiritual bond that makes the two people one. To bring more people into that makes that bold mean less, and it makes it less strong. I just don't think it could work out in the long run.

Sure, you might have fun for a while, but someone's gonna end up getting hurt very deeply.


I guess it is. However, I support it just because it was forbidden at many times in scriptural history, however it was allowed during the time of King David for certain people etc. It's not like murder which is always forbidden.
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones wrote:
for the last time, racerx, we do not make laws in this country based on religious beliefs.


When do you think I encouraged that? I did say

me wrote:
The times when it is sinful (again this is a religious point of view, having no bearing on whether the govt should allow it or not)


which I think clearly states that I don't believe that my beliefs should become law. Perhaps you misread?
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
racerx_is_alive wrote:
which I think clearly states that I don't believe that my beliefs should become law. Perhaps you misread?


I did. Pardon my haste.
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
racerx_is_alive wrote:
Currently, I believe that he has commanded us not to engage in this.


Good, show us where. :)
Author:  racerx_is_alive [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't suppose you'll accept the Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants, and the teachings of modern prophets? If not, probably nowhere. If so, plenty of places. (Mostly the teachings of modern prophets, but also in the 1st Declaration in the Doctrine and Covenants)
Author:  Upsilon [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
Upsilon wrote:
Kef pretty much summed up my attitude towards polygamy in his first post. If there's no deceit involved, it's okay.

AgentTransparent: I don't see how anyone in a polygamous relationship will be very deeply hurt, as long as everyone is open about it and no one minds. What is there to be hurt by?


Lemme answer your question with a question.

Have you ever been in a completely committed relationship?


By "relationship" I assume you mean a sexual relationship, right?

Quote:
Lived with a woman for any extended period of time?


Yes. I've lived with my mother all my life. ;)

Quote:
Men and women are by nature possessive. We have something that we have and it's ours and we want it and don't wanna share it and it's ours and no one else's.


Well, hey, that doesn't mean it's wrong to share it - the only people you'd be harming is yourselves. If anyone is inclined to it (which you deem implausible), I don't see a problem.

Quote:
It's not in our nature to share love.


If some people do it, it must be within at least some people's nature.
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
Have you ever been in a completely committed relationship? Lived with a woman for any extended period of time? If you have then surely you'll understand the following:

Men and women are by nature possessive. We have something that we have and it's ours and we want it and don't wanna share it and it's ours and no one else's.

It's not in our nature to share love. Look even in the Old Testament. Yeah, polygamy was present, but there was resentment from the men's concubines, or other wives.


Excuse me for quoting the entire thing (I hate that), but this is 100% wrong, and I already addressed it in much of my post. Men and women are not by nature possessive, simply because polygamists are a tiny minority. They are trained from their very birth by society to be possessive, because their parents are possessive and every single person on TV is possessive and every person they meet is possessive. There is a huge difference. We live in a society in which it is required for one person to be faithful to one person and vice versa. This is not the case in every culture (though sadly, most), nor has it always been the case. Psychologists talk about nature vs. nurture, and just like racism and homophobia, this is the result of nurture.

Upsilon wrote:
If some people do it, it must be within at least some people's nature.


Upsilon makes a very good point. I said it before but it bears repeating: There are thousands of successful polygamous relationships in the U.S. right now, and there have been millions around the world throughout history. The fact that it does not work for most people does not mean that it could not work for most people if we lived in a more mature society.
Author:  AgentSeethroo [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
Then how do you account for the resentment shown in old testament polygamy settings that I referred to? If I was at home I'd do some proper research on this for you, but you know how it is.

How does that apply to your nature vs. nurture situation?
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
AgentSeethroo wrote:
Then how do you account for the resentment shown in old testament polygamy settings that I referred to? If I was at home I'd do some proper research on this for you, but you know how it is.


The society of the Old Testament was just as riddled with arbitrary taboos as modern society.

Though I'm no prehistorian, monogamy taboos are presumably as old as patriarchy is, when primitive men first became the dominant group in society and first exterted their personal greed on women. I couldn't say when it first began to work both ways (i.e. monogamy required of both men and women), but in many cultures it still doesn't.
Author:  Stu [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
Breaking off the current debate... a little.

One of the reasons I think people seem to feel polygamy is so wrong (at least here in Utah) is due to the publicity that fellows like Tom Green (not from mtv) and his group get.

If you want to have multiple wives, then I don't think it is up to the government to tell you not to (back to the same-sex marriage, I feel the same way). But I don't think it is ok for a 40 year old man to be having those sorts of relationships with 13-14 year old girls (not women, girls. Because, at 13-14 you are not mature enough to be getting married/having kids/etc...)

Of the "thousands" of polygamist relationships here in the US, only a handful of them ever make it to the evening news. But the ones that do, give the rest of them a bad reputation.

Another venture from the current debate.... during high school I started dating this girl. I come to find out (in the middle of our relationship) that her father is polygamist. I was only 16 at the time. Needless to say, I was a little weirded out. :)
Author:  Professor No [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think polygamy is wrong but should still legal, because once again I point the rule of thumb, that somthing can not be illegal if it does not harm another person...
Author:  JoeyDay [ Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Stu wrote:
Another venture from the current debate.... during high school I started dating this girl. I come to find out (in the middle of our relationship) that her father is polygamist. I was only 16 at the time. Needless to say, I was a little weirded out. :)

That's funny... The same thing happened to me once.
Author:  lumberpeg vegeplank [ Sun Sep 19, 2004 12:20 am ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones wrote:
While I'ma little skeptical of your poll options, I have an opinion about this. Polygamy shouldn't be illegal. There are only two arguments against polygamy. The first is a religious one. We've already discussed why making laws based a particular religiou beliefs is stupid, particularly in a country where the Constitution specifically prohibits it, so we'll skip that bit. The second argument is that it's somehow inherently societally harmful. Of course, that's bunk.

There is another big one:

Women tend to be exploited and unfairly treated in polygamous relationships. While there are ones that exist with the men many in number, the majority of polygamists exist as a man with a bunch of women.

I agree with consenting-adult relationships, but I worry about teh freedom of women inside such relationships. I don't know any polygamists personally, to be honest, but I know how men are, and what kind of power trips they can go on. There is nothing more upsetting to me than to see women exploited and trapped.

I am for freedom. If someone can be happy in such a relationship, so be it. As for me, I can never see something liek this ever being possible. I am not built this way -- I am built with jealousy and individual loyalty; no one could ever share in what my wife and I share.
Author:  Buz [ Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:14 am ]
Post subject:  Less is More
I'm going to go with the "Less is More" principle of the law of diminishing returns on this one.

lumberjack vegetable wrote:
Women tend to be exploited and unfairly treated ... I worry about teh freedom of women inside such relationships. ...There is nothing more upsetting to me than to see women exploited and trapped.

LJV, you get a KF'nC bucket full of props from me on this insightful statement. One reason why sex with minors is illegal? To protect women. One reason rape is illegal? To protect women. A reason polygamy is illegal is to protect women. Most "sexual morality" that people find prudish, old-fashioned, or closed-minded actually protects women in general.

That's actually one reason I'm against the sexual license associated with the feminist movement. It's ideas promise greater freedom and power for women, but the practice often leads to less freedom and happiness for individual women... and often hurt, emotional pain, and hardships that "prudes" never have to stuggle with in thier simplistic practices.

The challenge is not so much legal as it is moral. Polygamy can happen even in a country or state where multiple marriages are illegal by happening before the wedding. Promiscuity is, for all practical purposes, polygamy. And the things I try to avoid, and encourage other people to avoid, in polygamy happen in promiscuity the same. And to the more conservative people in the Bible Belt, divorce and remarriage has some of those problems as well because of its polygamous features.

lumberjack vegetable wrote:
I am built with jealousy and individual loyalty; no one could ever share in what my wife and I share.

Good man. Ditto 110%.
Author:  StrongRad [ Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
I can't imagine why someone would want to marry more than one person. I'm having a hard enough time with my one girlfriend/fiance... I can't imagine multiplying that by 2, 3, or 4.... LOL (she's great, I swear!)

That's why I almost pittied Osama when I found out he has multiple wives.. NAG! NAG! NAG!!! Poor man.. Just kidding.

Pathetic attepmts at humor aside, I don't know that I really see a problem with polygamy as long as all parties are willing and know what's going on. I mean, I have religious objections to it, but that's kinda weak, because I have religious objections to some of the things I do.. Besides, like I feel about any touchy religious subject.. If it is a sin, the sinner will be punished by God, so anything we do to persecute or prosecute is really meaningless.. If it is not a sin, then there is no reason to persecute or prosecute.. (I apologize to those of you that have heard me say that in the gay marriage debate, you're probably getting tired of reading that.)
Author:  Beyond the Grave [ Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:10 am ]
Post subject: 
man one wife is hard enough i can't imagine having to deal with 5 or more.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/