Since more people want gay marriage, is it OK to have polygamy as well?

if we're "discriminating" against the gays, shouldn't we allow polygamy and other forms of relationships?


0|0
13|11

Most Helpful Girl

  • Here's the deal- gay marriage and polygamy are not the same thing at all. Marriage- gay or straight- is about committing to ONE person for the rest of your life. Polygamy is, by nature, committing to multiple relationships. Two totally different things- you can't argue that if gay marriage is legal, polygamy should be. One is about the the gender of the two people in the relationship and the other one is about the NUMBER of people in the relationship. Apples and oranges my friend...

    Personally, I wouldn't care all that much if polygamy were legalized provided there were some guidelines- mainly that for your second,third, fourth etc. marriages to be legal, all of your current spouses must sign off on having knowledge of them. I know that's complicated legally, but I think they should have to know about it and make the decision if they want to be part of it. And of course, all the same age requirements as a monogamous marriage should apply. That's the biggest problem I see with polygamous religious sects now- many of them have child brides which I disagree with no matter WHAT kind of marriage it is.

    I'm cool with it as long as it's between consenting adults- not my style, but whatever floats your boat.

    0|1
    1|0

What Girls Said 12

  • I don't see why not...married couples can act like they are polygamous without actually being married, so making it legal won't make much of a difference. Such things should be up to the folks involved, not the views of those who oppose it. It really bothers me that America was founded with the idea of a separation of church and state, yet there are laws in place mostly because the bible says it's wrong.

    1|1
    0|0
    • actually just fyi, the church and state separation idea was just to keep one national church from existing much like how england had the church of england. it had nothing to do with religion not being allowed in government or the public. that is why there is so many christian and other religios ideas in old government docs etc. it wasn't until 50 years ago that the supreme court changed it making a complete separation of church and state. look it up and study for yourself.

  • No. I think you're trying to make a political point with this question, but this is a LARGE leap. Even if gay marriage is legalized, this doesn't mean it's a gateway to polygamy or "other forms" marriages. it's still keeping marriage between 2 people. Any other form would be changing the numbers or *vomit* species of beings. So you're leaping to something that is a much larger stretch then gay marriage. And no, polygamy will never be okay. But that is not what gay marriage is suggesting at all.

    0|1
    1|1
  • I've had this thought as well.

    You'd think that traditionally polygamist religions would be pushing it, but I don't really hear about anything.

    Polygamy is one of the few things that bothers me. I understand gay marriage because it is the same principle as straight marriage. One person loves another and they vow to be together for eternity. So the government should recognize it.

    Polygamy isn't saying that. So, perhaps it makes me a sign-toting idiot, but I say no to polygamy right now. Maybe one day, but I just don't think of it as 'marriage'.

    0|0
    1|0
  • polygamy is short for HAREM,if a woman wants to share her man,fine,but polygamy should not be considered an excuse to cheat

    0|0
    2|0
    • If polygamy was legal one woman could marry many men too. And it is not cheating if everyone involved gives consent.

  • Polygamy would get too complicated legally, while a homosexual marriage could legally be handled exactly like a heterosexual marriage. If people want multiple partners, marriage is not for them.

    0|0
    1|1
    • I don't think you get to say who marriage is for.

    • Show All
    • not hundreds of new bills into law.

    • I agree polygamous marriages would be more complicated than two person marriages. But two person marriages are more complicated than being single so shouldn't we just get rid of marriage entirely if your goal is simplification?

      I DISAGREE that many new laws would need to be written. Only one law would be required, and that would be a law that requires prenuptial agreements for all marriages that covers things like death, divorce, assets, children, etc. Let people hammer it out on their own.

  • I say let choose their relationships however they please. We are too quick to judge others based on our limited view of the world. As long as no minors are involved, I don't see why not.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yeah and people should able to get married to their dog

    0|0
    0|0
  • Of course

    0|0
    0|0
  • You do know that in the the old days polygamy was legal right and a man could marry more than one woman and then it changed to just one man and one woman .

    0|0
    0|0
  • Polygamy, although it at first seems like it would benefit men, would actually really work to a man's disadvantage. That's why it was outlawed here in the first place. There aren't enough women for every man to have more than one. And, if women are forced to play second, third, or fourth fiddle to other women, our standards change. We're looking solely for the richest man at that point to make it worthwhile. So the top 10% of men will have all the women, and the other 90% of men are single, virgins for life.

    Look up all the studies on it, it's really MEN who wanted to get rid of polygamy so that they all had a chance to have a woman. And of course women were OK with this so that we could have a man just to ourselves as well.

    Gay marriage is not the precursor to this. It's still 2 people in one marriage.

    6|0
    0|0
    • That's logical. Good answer. :)

    • Show All
    • Lol guys think that and it's completely ludicrous. I've never seen a large pool of men left out of the dating game. It's always a pretty equal number of men and women. However, with so few men willing to get married these days, it will turn into that, yes. Women will be turning to the men who aren't just trying to have casual sex forever.

  • Polygamy already exists outside of the law and so does polyamory (plural relationships) or multiple lovers so the difference is just putting it into legal terms... what's the difference really? Its gonna happen legal or not... I do think Gay marriage should be allowed for the simple fact its between 2 people and some of them in my opinion would honor the vows better than straight couples. I think what other people do with in the walls of their own homes is none of anyones business but their own except for the legal term of what marriage means. If they are happy or misaerably married why do we care? Just my opinion.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Sure, I wouldn't mind if polygamy was legal. They just have to be consenting adults. Growing up in the West we have all these prejudices against it, but it's actually a pretty common form of marriage worldwide. Our attitudes towards these issues are constantly evolving, so who knows maybe 100 years from now it won't be a big deal.

    1|1
    0|0

What Guys Said 11

  • We allow plural relationships. IT is totally legal for a man and three women to buy a house and for him to have sex with all three of them.

    Somewhat ironically, if a man and a women move in and have a sexual relationship for a few years, the government decides they are married and affords legal rights. But if a second woman showed up and started sleeping with him, she'd get no protection at all.

    Who is the current law protecting?

    0|0
    0|0
  • No one has any business interfering in the activities between consenting adults.

    2|2
    0|0
  • Whenever there is a choice between two options, I almost always go with the one that affords people more freedom, so yes, polygamy should be legalized.

    2|0
    0|0
  • Nah, there aren't enough women to go around.

    Why don't we just legalize gay marriage amongst men, but bar women from marrying one another?

    0|0
    0|0
  • I don't think they're similar, but I have no problem with it(in theory) being legal

    0|1
    0|0
  • I don't think most people "want gay marriage", they just don't really care if gay people are together and want to get married at the courthouse or whatever. Being detached from the issue and tolerant isn't being a proponent of it.

    0|2
    0|0
  • What do you mean by other forms?

    0|0
    0|0
  • Just you typing "the gays" shows who you are as a person. Grow up boy

    2|0
    0|0
    • really? what am i? at least I'm out in the open and not "anonymous"

    • Always answer anon regardless of the context little boy. You are disrespectful to yourself so you are the same to others.

  • Gay marriage won't ignite polygamy.

    0|0
    0|0
  • So you're saying since gay marriage is becoming legal in more and more states, that polygamy should be legalized. How in the world do you get that?

    The U.S. isn't freaking Saudi Arabia

    0|0
    0|1
    • Saudi is ruled by a king and is allowed to have as many wives as he wants, at once

  • Is there a demand for it?

    Are a plurality of people in favour of it?

    No?

    Then STFU.

    0|0
    0|1
    • so, only if there's a demand? really? stupid answer!

    • Show All
    • Good thing we're not a democracy. Too bad you are too stupid to know that.

    • Typical American - thinks everyone in the world is from there, and we all share the same form of government...

      Twat.

Loading...