LBGT marriage rights vs Polygamist marriage rights?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The math, it is hard.

I guess they don't do percentage math or understand estate planning

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

i think this is going to be what the upcoming generation has to convince my generation to get on board with as a new normal. polyamory is more popular an ideal with the youngsters.

The only ones I've seen work for any period of time is in bdsm where you have one domme running a household.. I've yet to see a male dom run a household successfully because there are too many options for fem subs...

The simple poly situations seem to fall apart whenever a holiday comes around and they have to pretend to not be poly for the families - the secondary usually gets fed up at this point.. I've seen one where two couples each have a primary and then the other partners as a secondary - I'm not sure why they just don't call that swinging. I guess it makes them feel better

On topic: Opening the door for polygamy I think also brings in a host of permutations. I don't want any sort of shacking up to be illegal as long as everyone is on board.. But we need to untangle some of the legal advantages from being married from our society instead of trying to figure out how to handle a multitude of living situations..

Edited August 1, 2014 by OnMyWayID

[mota bhai 2,675]

... we need to untangle some of the legal advantages from being married from our society instead of trying to figure out how to handle a multitude of living situations..

+1

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

and that would be different with multiple spouses how?

Because it involves tearing up a whole law libraries worth of civil laws.

A couple of hypothetical situations for you:

1. If you marry two women - but then meet another who is already married to two men. You want to marry her - how does this work? Do you also marry the men? What if one of the men doesn't want to marry you?
2. If one person wants to get divorced from one of the people they have married (but not the others), how would that work? How would you determine child custody, alimony etc. etc.?

It's enough to make your brain ache, without looking at the legal stuff.

[mota bhai 2,675]

1. If you marry two women - but then meet another who is already married to two men. You want to marry her - how does this work? Do you also marry the men? What if one of the men doesn't want to marry you?

It would work fine if we declare women property. Instead of marrying them, we buy them and sell them. And no piece of property can have more than one owner. It's not that difficult really.

If one person wants to get divorced from one of the people they have married (but not the others), how would that work? How would you determine child custody, alimony etc. etc.?

One way around that would be to embrace the corporate concept. Instead of marriages, we form LLCs. A child born in that LLC is a product of that LLC. If you decide to quit an LLC or if you are removed due to misconduct you no longer have any rights to the product.

Of course you can't be removed without misconduct anymore. Say bye bye to the 'at will' divorce.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The math, it is hard.

Look at the real-world examples of polygamous marriage.

• Sharia Law - we don't like that, because it comes with associated curtailment of women's rights.
• The Mormons (and other cults) - tends to be a single 'patriarch' with a host of wives of differing ages. Again, brings with it reasonable concerns about spousal equality.

The only way you could make polygamy legit is to make it useless to the people who would actually want to participate in it. But if you do that, you may as well abolish marriage altogether.

It would work fine if we declare women property. Instead of marrying them, we buy them and sell them. And no piece of property can have more than one owner. It's not that difficult really.

One way around that would be to embrace the corporate concept. Instead of marriages, we form LLCs. A child born in that LLC is a product of that LLC. If you decide to quit an LLC or if you are removed due to misconduct you no longer have any rights to the product.

Of course you can't be removed without misconduct anymore. Say bye bye to the 'at will' divorce.

Which is why I said at the outset that it would likely be a vehicle for fraud.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

It's hard for many to understand libertarian based values. I don't have to agree with something, to think that someone should enjoy the same rights I do. I know that is a foreign concept to the far left and far right .

[SMOKE 1,426]

Because it involves tearing up a whole law libraries worth of civil laws.

A couple of hypothetical situations for you:

1. If you marry two women - but then meet another who is already married to two men. You want to marry her - how does this work? Do you also marry the men? What if one of the men doesn't want to marry you?
2. If one person wants to get divorced from one of the people they have married (but not the others), how would that work? How would you determine child custody, alimony etc. etc.?

It's enough to make your brain ache, without looking at the legal stuff.

get the shredder out. equality means being equal.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I trust everyone missed the bit in the article I posted earlier that plural marriage was the original state of things. Monogamous, heterosexual marriage came after...

get the shredder out. equality means being equal.

Then you advocate there being no family laws at all. I'm not sure that's a brilliant state of affairs really.

[Teddy B 17,251]

It's hard for many to understand libertarian based values. I don't have to agree with something, to think that someone should enjoy the same rights I do. I know that is a foreign concept to the far left and far right .

Libertarian values? Life isn't a 70's porn flick.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

A couple of hypothetical situations for you:

1. If you marry two women - but then meet another who is already married to two men. You want to marry her - how does this work? Do you also marry the men? What if one of the men doesn't want to marry you?
2. If one person wants to get divorced from one of the people they have married (but not the others), how would that work? How would you determine child custody, alimony etc. etc.?

It's enough to make your brain ache, without looking at the legal stuff.

Google "pedestrian polyamory" - It is a podcast by a "couple" in these type of situations - they are trying to build a multiple woman/man home though they only get to multiple men before the first male (the father of her children) gets booted.. You can hear how they handle living arrangement and the kids in the aftermath. Very interesting.. Though in the end very sad.

[Boiler 43,517]

With modern technology it should not be that hard to do, you can friend and un friend somebody on Facebook, no reason why they could not offer the same thing with marry an divorce.

No real reason anybody else should know or be any of their business whether you are married or not.

Just get the Government out of it and let it be whatever social construct you want it to be.

[Teddy B 17,251]

With modern technology it should not be that hard to do, you can friend and un friend somebody on Facebook, no reason why they could not offer the same thing with marry an divorce.

No real reason anybody else should know or be any of their business whether you are married or not.

Just get the Government out of it and let it be whatever social construct you want it to be.

But who would oversee the divison of property, child custody and child support issues?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

With modern technology it should not be that hard to do, you can friend and un friend somebody on Facebook, no reason why they could not offer the same thing with marry an divorce.

No real reason anybody else should know or be any of their business whether you are married or not.

Just get the Government out of it and let it be whatever social construct you want it to be.

Yeah, that's probably what would happen if there was a nuclear war tomorrow. Everyone would make up their own rules and there would be no government. Except for the guy with the hundred women and the fortified bunker full of guns.

But who would oversee the divison of property, child custody and child support issues?

Presumably the man with the gun or the biggest stick.

[Boiler 43,517]

I swear to god I don't get Liberals. If a man in a poverty area, wants to run around and impregnate 5 different women, with no means to support any of them, then it's our duty as caring Americans to provide them tax payer assited substance for life so we can encourage this behavior.

If a man wants to take legal responsibility for 5 different women, provide for their needs, and raise them as a family with no help from the Govt. Well. it just can't be allowed

Yes America they do think that upside down

Exactly