Gay and Polygamous Marriages/Unions

[Fluffy]

This is a bit of a curiosity of mine. Do those who support some form of marriage or union for gays feel that the same right should be extended to polygamous marriages?

Just so everyone is clear, a polygamous marriage is a marriage where one partner has more than one partner, regardless of gender. Theoretically, any of the partners could have multiple married partners or all be inter-married although usually there is one person married to the rest and therefore a polygamous marriage need not be homosexual in nature and usually isn't.

Also I'm not expecting much here but do those who feel that homosexual marriage should not be allowed, feel that polygamous marriage should be given some sort of legal status given that no homosexuality goes on in it?

Poll to follow.

Oh yes and my view is that full marriage rights should be given to both types of marriage although obviously some of the financial benefits that married couples recieve might have to be rebalanced for polygamous marriages so all is fair.

 

[Green Gaia]

I would not oppose full marriage rights for polygamous marriages. Although I admit I probably wouldn't fight with as much gusto for polygamous marriage as I do same sex marriage. Everyone has to drawn the line on what issues they devote their lives too. Otherwise you'll go insane.

 

[Jaymes]

I support both. I know several people in polyamorous relationships, and I see no reason why they shouldn't get full legal rights.

 

[CaptainXeroid]

I voted to support SSM but not polygamous unions(orgies).

Going from man-woman marriage to man-man or woman-woman from a legal standpoint, is very simple. If you allow more than 2 people to enter into an arrangement which approximates marriage, you will create an entire new category of law related to issues these 'marriages' would create.

What happens when a person wants to put more than one spouse on his insurance and the carrier refuses to acknowledge the 'marriage'?

Would there be laws disallowing polygamous marriages for convenience, i.e., to help an illegal alien become a US citizen??

And don't even get started on the train wreck that could result from untangling one of these arrangements in divorce court.:banghead3:

Bottom line, the concept of marriage is set up for 2 people.

 

[Aqualung]

"support" is a rather active term. I don't "support" them in that I would really like if people would get married if they're gay, or get married to numerous people, and I don't go fighting for that sort of thing. I can't actively support something that is against my morals. On the other hand, I don't actively fight it, either. If they want to get married, go for it. I can't actively fight something that goes against how a government should be.

 

[MaddLlama]

I support both. Polyamory gets a bad rap, but I've seen it work out well. I see no reason to make them "illegetimate" relationships. =)

 

[Crystallas]

Its not my business. Why does my support mean anything to someone that doesnt care about me? Havent crossed that road with any of my aquaintences, and Im not going to act like an expert because I know people in that boat.

 

[zombieharlot]

I voted to support SSM but not polygamous unions(orgies).

Going from man-woman marriage to man-man or woman-woman from a legal standpoint, is very simple. If you allow more than 2 people to enter into an arrangement which approximates marriage, you will create an entire new category of law related to issues these 'marriages' would create.

What happens when a person wants to put more than one spouse on his insurance and the carrier refuses to acknowledge the 'marriage'?

Would there be laws disallowing polygamous marriages for convenience, i.e., to help an illegal alien become a US citizen??

And don't even get started on the train wreck that could result from untangling one of these arrangements in divorce court.:banghead3:

Bottom line, the concept of marriage is set up for 2 people.

I would say that I'm with you on this one. As hard as it may be to understand for some, I would support polygamy in union, but not union by marriage. This is strictly because of the law-related issues that you have mentioned and a whole slew of others that may arise as well. Although, I think it would be kind of funny if there was a first, second, and third lady in the white house.

 

[James the Persian]

I do not support either, due to religious convictions. However, nor do I oppose the state recognising such marriages so long as they do not attempt to interfere with the Church. I don't believe that either side of the issue has the right to expect that, and especially not to force, others will share their moral stance. Both sides ought to be capable of respecting the views of the other.

James

 

[Sunstone]

I see no reason whatsoever to oppose homosexual marriages. That is, there is no evidence that I know of which would suggest that homosexual marriages would be detrimental to others.

I have some reservations about polygamy. I recognize that a male with more than one wife is a common mating pattern in humans, and that a female with more than one husband is common enough in some few cultures. But I'm not sure about the effects these sorts of arrangements have on the societies that practice them. It occurs to me that there might be consequences to polygamy that I'm ignorant of, and before giving it my stamp of approval, I'd like to study it more.

 

[Atheist_Dave]

I support both fully.

 

[ΩRôghênΩ]

i support neither

 

[c0da]

I voted support gay marriage but not polygamy.

 

[pdoel]

I voted that I would support gay marriages but not polygamous ones.

I agree with the Capn. The laws that would be required to make such a union happen, just boggle the mind. While some see a traditional marriage as being man/woman, I guess I see a traditional marriage more as just between two people. I think the same laws should apply. Two people, non-relatives, consenting adults.

 

[Revasser]

I fully support both.

I know folks who are in very stable, loving and healthy polyamorous relationships and if all parties at some point wished to have their relationship "solidified" by a legal mechanism, I would support a law that allowed it.

Of course, instituting such a law would require a lot more jiggery-pokery than same-sex marriage, but I'd support it all the same. We must continue ever forward.

 

[michel]

I voted Thus:-

I support both gay marriage and polygamous marriage

Although I am not certain how I feel about Polygamous marriages.

I can't personally think of a moral objection, although personally, (as a Christian), I would have problems understanding such marriages within my faith.

 

[Mike182]

i would support peoples legal rights to both

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I would never support polygamous marriages. I can't see how polygamy would encourage a healthy society that already has immense social struggles with divorce, alimony, and so forth. If our culture already produced strong marriages, polygamy might work. As it is, it would produce nothing but choas IMO.

We've seen that most people cannot even get along with one person for their entire life. I cannot imagine why anyone would support adding more people into a situation that is already unstable. Socially, our court system could not handle the quagmire of such a twisted family situation. Can you imagine sorting out family visitation rights to everyone involved, not to mention alimony payments, division of property, and all the other legal bs that this madness would produce?

 

[Mike182]

I would never support polygamous marriages. I can't see how polygamy would encourage a healthy society that already has immense social struggles with divorce, alimony, and so forth. If our culture already produced strong marriages, polygamy might work. As it is, it would produce nothing but choas IMO.

We've seen that most people cannot even get along with one person for their entire life. I cannot imagine why anyone would support adding more people into a situation that is already unstable. Socially, our court system could not handle the quagmire of such a twisted family situation. Can you imagine sorting out family visitation rights to everyone involved, not to mention alimony payments, division of property, and all the other legal bs that this madness would produce?

i would argue that in my friendship group, i used to fall out with my closest friend a lot, because we spent so much time together - a third friend, of both of us, would come in a pretty much seperate us for a bit, kinda like a moderator, and sort us both out, and we'd make friends again

on a larger scale, i would argue that polygamous relationships would do this as well - maybe that is the way to "fix" this current divorce "crisis"

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

"support" is a rather active term. I don't "support" them in that I would really like if people would get married if they're gay, or get married to numerous people, and I don't go fighting for that sort of thing. I can't actively support something that is against my morals.

I have to agree with this statement.

On a side note, I wonder how many people agree that monogomous relationships are humanly unnatural. Believe it or not there are many studies on this subject. http://search.mywebsearch.com/mywebsearch/GGmain.jhtml?st=bar&ptnrS=ZCxdm313&searchfor=unnatural+monogamy

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria