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

[Father Heathen]

My statement was valid. Religion is a good enough reason.

But what about the biblical figures who had multiple wives? The bible condoned slavery, beating disobedient slaves and even gave instructions on how to sell ones own daughter into an arranged marriage, which amounts to nothing more than sexual slavery. Kind of an odd thing to use as a moral guide.

 

[Father Heathen]

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

Superior morals are derived from reason and compassion rather than from ancient superstitions and cultural norms, which were often irrational, cruel and unjust.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

If morals come from religion, then certainly you wouldn't mind following the morality of Satanism, right?

If religion is enough justification for morality, then you must also approve of child sacrifice, right? What about slavery? Polygamy?

 

[Sunstone]

Superior morals are derived from reason and compassion rather than from ancient superstitions and cultural norms, which were often irrational, cruel and unjust.

What's cruel and unjust about Solomon having hundreds of wives and concubines?

 

[Father Heathen]

What's cruel and unjust about Solomon having hundreds of wives and concubines?

I doubt many were betrothed by choice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Real life example #4
Partner A wanted an open relationship. Partner B didn't want one, but agreed to keep from losing Partner A. Partner B is unhappy with the situation.

This one stuck out for me, because it can be flipped around to work as an argument for open marriage:

Partner B wanted a closed relationship. Partner A didn't want one, but agreed to keep from losing Partner B. Partner A is unhappy with the situation.

I think it's more of an argument against getting into a relationship with someone when you're not on the same page with them than it is an argument against (or for) open marriage.

children would grow up thinking that commitment and loyalty is unnecessary. That could adversely affect their relationships in the future...and if they have children of their own, their lack of commitment to the other parent may cause them to abandon their own children.

IOW, if we allow open relationships, people might think open relationships are okay.

That seems a bit circular, IMO.

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

No, it's not where morals come from.

But if you disagree, rather than pull this thread off-track, maybe you'd like to participate in another thread I started a while ago: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...121105-what-do-religious-beliefs-have-do.html

BTW - the only people that the Bible says should be monogamous are presbyters. For everyone else, the Old Testament allows for multiple wives and the New Testament never says anything against this.

 

[Sunstone]

I doubt many were betrothed by choice.

I doubt many had much in the way of a love life, either.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

The same could be said for monogamous relationships.

Excellent point!! :clap

 

[Panda]

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

Without being able to justify this reasoning you are still just using your religion as a shield to support your prejudices. If religion is where morals come from does that mean people who aren't religious have no morals?

 

[darkstar]

The same could be said for monogamous relationships.

Very true. In truth most marriages or relationships that end, in general end badly because the people involved are not open and honest. I'm sure those reasons usually result in the ending of the relationship in question.

Either way, the biggest thing I would point out is that monogamy isn't for everyone. Neither are open relationships.

I do think, however, that one should be free to explore the options and discover for themselves. And see no real concrete reason to deny that pursuit of discovery. Obviously if its against someone's beliefs to have an open relationship, its not going to be right for that person to go against their beliefs or be pressured to do so.
And the same could be said for the other side.

As a point blank reply to the OP:
But the original question is "Are there significant moral grounds to oppose open marriage" and honestly no there isn't a moral reason to oppose others or the freedom to do with their lives what they will. In fact to do so would be inherently IMMORAL.

If you're against it fine, don't do it.
If you are for it, go for it. But don't try to push it on anyone.

For religious people that would oppose the freedom to do the things that you disagree with.
If you believe in God... he gave us free will. We have the choice to do what we want or not. If its important that people come to your God out of free will... you should stop forcing them to live to your rules because you are dooming people. They either come to your views out of force, which negate it because they come not of their free will. Or they fight against your views and are harassed for being evil sinners and never get to exercise their free will. They live unhappily and never really get the chance to explore and figure things out.

The basics rules should be live and let live.

 

[Sunstone]

Very true. In truth most marriages or relationships that end, in general end badly because the people involved are not open and honest.

While I agree with much of what you've said, I strongly disagree with the notion that most relationships and marriages that end, end because the people involved were not open and honest. Instead, I think other factors are more often at play.

According both to what I've read and to what I've seen, marriages and relationships most often end because the partners have gradually grown apart over a period of years.

That's the main reason, but beyond that there is because one of the partners is abusive of the other; for financial reasons; or because of the failing health of one of the partners.

Then there are less frequent reasons than those four. The upshot is, a lack of openness and honesty appears to be an insignificant cause in most dissolutions.

 

[darkstar]

While I agree with much of what you've said, I strongly disagree with the notion that most relationships and marriages that end, end because the people involved were not open and honest. Instead, I think other factors are more often at play.

According both to what I've read and to what I've seen, marriages and relationships most often end because the partners have gradually grown apart over a period of years.

That's the main reason, but beyond that there is because one of the partners is abusive of the other; for financial reasons; or because of the failing health of one of the partners.

Then there are less frequent reasons than those four. The upshot is, a lack of openness and honesty appears to be an insignificant cause in most dissolutions.

I meant that its a main reason for messy breakup. And a major contributing factor in most break ups. One spouse cheats, the other finds out. Where as, if they had grown apart and talked it over and separated it has more potential for a respectful parting of ways.

There are plenty of other messes, and lots of reasons to leave your partner. Abuse or lack of trust being big ones. However I was trying to state that a level of maturity and openness can make it more of a non violent break up rather than "I'm tossing your clothes out on the lawn and locking you out of the house" kind of break up. At least in the non abusive relationships.

Just trying to clear it up. Dunno if you misread the statement or if I wasn't clear in my wording. Hopefully this cleared it up a bit.

 

[Sunstone]

I meant that its a main reason for messy breakup. And a major contributing factor in most break ups. One spouse cheats, the other finds out. Where as, if they had grown apart and talked it over and separated it has more potential for a respectful parting of ways.

There are plenty of other messes, and lots of reasons to leave your partner. Abuse or lack of trust being big ones. However I was trying to state that a level of maturity and openness can make it more of a non violent break up rather than "I'm tossing your clothes out on the lawn and locking you out of the house" kind of break up. At least in the non abusive relationships.

Just trying to clear it up. Dunno if you misread the statement or if I wasn't clear in my wording. Hopefully this cleared it up a bit.

That clarifies things admirably. Thank you.

 

[Me Myself]

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

I know a lot of atheistic people with better moral than most "christians" I know.


BTW, comments like:

How dare you.

Are a little bit off here.

We dare.

We are in a religion fo0rum because we like talking about things other people don´t dare to talk.
----------------

Topic at hand:

I think this question would depend a lot in the cases. Morality in relationship has a lot to do with intentions and attention to each member involved and it´s incredibly mutable.

What is immoral for one couple to do, would be immoral for another couple not to do.

I am sure that open relationships can be lead responsably and lovingly to each parti involved. I am also sure it can be carried disastrously and scarringly to everyone around.

It not only depends on if they are "adults" (read, above 21 in biological age) but a heckuvalot more to do if they are EMOTIONALY mature enough to handle it.
BUT

This is true with any marriage.

This one does indeed probably need more maturity in both parts for it to work, and also of course that both parts are happy with this.

children would grow up thinking that commitment and loyalty is unnecessary. That could adversely affect their relationships in the future...and if they have children of their own, their lack of commitment to the other parent may cause them to abandon their own children.

It is also of great importance to notice that you can love someone without having sex with him/Her and that trust and love are not based solely in with whom you sleep with.

Adultery is something that personally always revolved my stomach because to think that someone is capable of hurting a loved one´s trust only for some ephimerous gain makes me sick, it makes me ad and disappointed.

Now, if both parts consensually agree to an open relationship, there is no "trust" to be broken on that regard. They´ll just trust each other to be good life partners, parents, friends and advisors to each others for the rest of their lifes.

Of course everyone knows that last part has nothing to do with loyalty or love in any way close to what sex has to do, right?

Love is bigger than sex. If you only want the cow because of the milk then guess what? you like milk, not cows

 

[Kathryn]

Either way, the biggest thing I would point out is that monogamy isn't for everyone. Neither are open relationships.

I do think, however, that one should be free to explore the options and discover for themselves. And see no real concrete reason to deny that pursuit of discovery. Obviously if its against someone's beliefs to have an open relationship, its not going to be right for that person to go against their beliefs or be pressured to do so.
And the same could be said for the other side.

As a point blank reply to the OP:
But the original question is "Are there significant moral grounds to oppose open marriage" and honestly no there isn't a moral reason to oppose others or the freedom to do with their lives what they will. In fact to do so would be inherently IMMORAL.

If you're against it fine, don't do it.
If you are for it, go for it. But don't try to push it on anyone.

Right. Which is exactly what I said in my first post on this thread. My husband and I not only AGREED to be monogamous in our relationship, it is extremely important to both of us to maintain a monogamous relationship. Neither of us has the slightest interest in an open relationship - in fact, it is something that we simply would not accept.

In fact, we were discussing this last night on our date to our favorite restaurant - the restaurant where we met and immediately "fell in love." We both adamantly prefer - and in fact insist on - monogamy. And we are very happy, very close and very fulfilled by our monogamous relationship.

For religious people that would oppose the freedom to do the things that you disagree with.
If you believe in God... he gave us free will. We have the choice to do what we want or not. If its important that people come to your God out of free will... you should stop forcing them to live to your rules because you are dooming people. They either come to your views out of force, which negate it because they come not of their free will. Or they fight against your views and are harassed for being evil sinners and never get to exercise their free will. They live unhappily and never really get the chance to explore and figure things out.

The basics rules should be live and let live.

Which is why this religious, monogamous person doesn't give a rat's *** who other adults have sex with. Have at it. Just don't ask me to subsidize your choices and we'll be fine.

 

[Kathryn]

Love is bigger than sex. If you only want the cow because of the milk then guess what? you like milk, not cows

This is a cute saying, but I don't see how it applies to monogamy.

People who are in long term monogamous relationships aren't in them simply for the "milk." There's milk for sale everywhere. If they loved milk instead of the cow, there's certainly no shortage of milk to be had - and very cheaply, I might add.

In fact, as my grandmother used to say, "Why buy the cow if you're getting the milk for free?"

 

[Me Myself]

This is a cute saying, but I don't see how it applies to monogamy.

People who are in long term monogamous relationships aren't in them simply for the "milk." There's milk for sale everywhere. If they loved milk instead of the cow, there's certainly no shortage of milk to be had - and very cheaply, I might add.

In fact, as my grandmother used to say, "Why buy the cow if you're getting the milk for free?"

It was a tweak of your grandmother´s saying actually

I say it applies here because there is too many emphasize on the sex instead of the person. It´s like who cares if you are going to be with this person for life? what we really want you to do is stop having sex with other people. That is the ONLY form of loyalty.

I believe this is simply not the case. Open relationships are not for everyone, least for now I would too go to the "not for me" side, but to say there is no commitment or loyalty in an open relationship is like saying the most important ting in marriage is sex and all the rest is what you do in between quickies (and longies )

 

[Kathryn]

It was a tweak of your grandmother´s saying actually

I say it applies here because there is too many emphasize on the sex instead of the person. It´s like who cares if you are going to be with this person for life? what we really want you to do is stop having sex with other people. That is the ONLY form of loyalty.

I believe this is simply not the case. Open relationships are not for everyone, least for now I would too go to the "not for me" side, but to say there is no commitment or loyalty in an open relationship is like saying the most important ting in marriage is sex and all the rest is what you do in between quickies (and longies )

I guess in some monogamous relationships (as well as open relationships) it all boils down to sex or who's having sex with whom. But I don't think that many long term relationships of any form are ultimately about sex.

To each his own. Personally, I would not be involved in any sort of sex with anyone who wasn't committed to monogamy, but hey, that's just my own personal preference.

I don't want free milk, and I don't give away milk either!

 

[McBell]

You are wrong. That is not what religion is at all. How dare you. Religion is a good enough reason because that is where morals come from.

Religion may be where you get your morals from, but religion is not where morality comes from.

 

[McBell]

This is a cute saying, but I don't see how it applies to monogamy.

People who are in long term monogamous relationships aren't in them simply for the "milk." There's milk for sale everywhere. If they loved milk instead of the cow, there's certainly no shortage of milk to be had - and very cheaply, I might add.

In fact, as my grandmother used to say, "Why buy the cow if you're getting the milk for free?"

Which merely emphasizes the point that it is the milk they want, not the cow.