Are there Reasonable Moral Grounds to Oppose Open Relationships and Marriages?

[Averroes]

I don't know about you guys but I'd be pretty embarrassed if I met a kid and he/she was like "here are my parents!" and two couples show up.

 

[blackout]

I don't know about you guys but I'd be pretty embarrassed if I met a kid and he/she was like "here are my parents!" and two couples show up.

This happens ALL THE TIME with divorce and remarriage.
And I do mean, all the time.

Adults are usually only embarassed by what they are not used to,
and do not know.
Children are usually only embarrassed by things that do not fit the classifications of 'normal'
of the parents of the other children around them.
(ie, the cycle continues...)

 

[Averroes]

Well, norm or not, 4 parents? Nah....confusion would commence indefinitely

 

[Sunstone]

This is really getting ridiculous when folks start making arguments that reasonable moral grounds for opposing open relationships and marriages is that some kids might be embarrassed to have two sets of parents. What kind of moral principle is that? The 12 year old girl blush factor?

 

[illykitty]

Well I cannot personally find any objections except for personal ones. What I'd like to know is why would you want to have an open relationship? It intrigues me, because I never found any reason to have someone else other than my husband.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I know... I gotcha I see our conversation as one of looking for truth. I think we are both hitting on a few different ones. I also see it as a matter of personal preference, but I think that it becomes a moral issue if it is damaging to the family unit. I don't really know of any cases of open marriages... only other cultures where women are corralled together and owned like property.

I'd say that an open marriage is the antithesis of one where a person is entirely controlled by his or her spouse.

When you say bring a third person into the relationship in some way, what way do you mean? Would they live with you, or would you just spend one week a month away from home?

I'm not sure. I haven't really fleshed out the idea; it was just that as I was responding, my mind went to the one or two polyamourous couples I know and I thought to myself "they make it work, and even though you're not drawn to that sort of arrangement now, never say never."

 

[Averroes]

This is really getting ridiculous when folks start making arguments that reasonable moral grounds for opposing open relationships and marriages is that some kids might be embarrassed to have two sets of parents. What kind of moral principle is that? The 12 year old girl blush factor?

How about addressing me directly since your comment which was after mine, appears to call my view ridiculous. It was an opinion of course I didn't mentioned the moral implocations behind it....what you thought people don't have side conversations in threads?

 

[Sunstone]

How about addressing me directly since your comment which was after mine, appears to call my view ridiculous. It was an opinion of course I didn't mentioned the moral implocations behind it....what you thought people don't have side conversations in threads?

Your comment wasn't the only one to reference personal embarrassment.

 

[Averroes]

Since Mr. SUNSTONE has noted his complaint allow me to put my two two cents in on the matter....


I don't find nothing inherently wrong with open relationships especially if the participating couple consents to it. Now it becomes wrong when one considers theiship open and the other doesn't. I personally believe that the implications behind open relationships is that people deep down aren't satisfied with one partner which of course if such is true, I have to question the commitment factor

 

[painted wolf]

This is really getting ridiculous when folks start making arguments that reasonable moral grounds for opposing open relationships and marriages is that some kids might be embarrassed to have two sets of parents. What kind of moral principle is that? The 12 year old girl blush factor?

It's giving me the vapors just thinking of it! :faint:

wa:do

 

[Drolefille]

Well I cannot personally find any objections except for personal ones. What I'd like to know is why would you want to have an open relationship? It intrigues me, because I never found any reason to have someone else other than my husband.

For me I see it as a similar question to "why would you want to have more than one kid?" I love both of my boyfriends, and they both love their wives as well, there's plenty to go around. But I fill a different role in each of their lives that their wife doesn't fill and vice versa. And both of them fill different roles in my life. I don't think one person can be everything to another person. And most people are ok with that and fill in the gaps with friends. Some people just fill in the gaps with other romantic relationships. Others just want a more exciting sex life. Open relationships are very varied.

 

[illykitty]

It's your lives though and no one should tell you how to live it (unless it harms someone, but this doesn't I presume). Although I would never be able to live this way, it's fine as long as everyone's happy.

I just cannot relate to it or understand at all because my marriage is very fufilled and my other social needs are filled with a close friend and family, as you said. Perhaps you people are a bit more socially needy? I don't know just trying to find out why you would need more than one lover. I do understand that no *one* person can be 100% perfect for you but isn't it this imperfection that we need to accept, instead of filling it with someone else? Or did I interpret it wrong?

 

[Drolefille]

It's your lives though and no one should tell you how to live it (unless it harms someone, but this doesn't I presume). Although I would never be able to live this way, it's fine as long as everyone's happy.

I just cannot relate to it or understand at all because my marriage is very fufilled and my other social needs are filled with a close friend and family, as you said. Perhaps you people are a bit more socially needy? I don't know just trying to find out why you would need more than one lover. I do understand that no *one* person can be 100% perfect for you but isn't it this imperfection that we need to accept, instead of filling it with someone else? Or did I interpret it wrong?

I agree that no one person is going to be your 100%. We tend to find our 90% or 85% or whatever we want to 'settle for' to 'settle down.' (And I mean that in no negative sense.)

To flip the question around: why not have more than one love, why limit yourself to one?

As I said, think of it in the perspective of having children. Why have more than one child? Some don't, some do. But the ones who do have enough love to go around, and find each child interesting and special in their own way, right? (Ideally at least, lets assume the best.) Relationships can work the same way. I'd consider these to be more polyamorous relationships.

Open relationships that are more about one or both partners seeking side sexual partners may be more about the excitement and/or fulfillment of fantasies/desires that one partner cannot fill.

 

[Averroes]

I agree that no one person is going to be your 100%. We tend to find our 90% or 85% or whatever we want to 'settle for' to 'settle down.' (And I mean that in no negative sense.)

To flip the question around: why not have more than one love, why limit yourself to one?

As I said, think of it in the perspective of having children. Why have more than one child? Some don't, some do. But the ones who do have enough love to go around, and find each child interesting and special in their own way, right? (Ideally at least, lets assume the best.) Relationships can work the same way. I'd consider these to be more polyamorous relationships.

Open relationships that are more about one or both partners seeking side sexual partners may be more about the excitement and/or fulfillment of fantasies/desires that one partner cannot fill.

This of course is according to you. My wife will always be my 100%

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I agree that no one person is going to be your 100%.

It happens. While it is very rare, some people do get complete satisfaction from the person they are with.

 

[blackout]

If any one person was your %100 there would be no need for friends, contemporaries, extended family, children etc etc....

They would be EVERYTHING you need relationally, all in one person.

This could be fine,
but I doubt it's the norm.

 

[Averroes]

If any one person was your %100 there would be no need for friends, contemporaries, extended family, children etc etc....

They would be EVERYTHING you need relationally, all in one person.

This could be fine,
but I doubt it's the norm.

Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

 

[Averroes]

It happens. While it is very rare, some people do get complete satisfaction from the person they are with.

No it is called fidelity. My partner is my waking thought and my last when I leave this earth well, that and my kids.

 

[blackout]

%100 MEANS the whole thing.
Totally. Completely.

 

[Songbird]

This of course is according to you. My wife will always be my 100%

You're setting yourself (and your future wife) up for serious disappointment.