Legality of polygamy

[InvestigateTruth]

In a lot of countries due to an old UN intrusion the country would have a different law for religious minorities. In some countries it goes for even minority races. In places like India the so called "low caste" would get some government benefits the so called "higher caste" would not get. Some of them are a bit jealous. This kind of different systems exist in many countries, in many circumstances.

This particular thread is to explore the morality or the sensibility or what ever angle you would like to look at, the legality of polygamy.

Typically this would be polygeny because we are addressing Islam directly, and it is wide spread, global, and various countries with lets say, "secular laws", like India, England, etc would have a different law for non-muslims where polygamy is illegal, unlike muslims, and that polyandry is out of the question.

I remember reading some stats about India where thought Muslims are given the right to polygamy, non-muslims in India have polygamous marriages far more than muslims. But, the question is, is it fair to give muslims one law, and the rest of the community another law. Some of the Buddhist countries in Asia have been murderously against this law calling it discrimination towards the Buddhist majority. Some Buddhist monks have engaged in creating riots over these kind of things which developed into lynching and killing of several people including a child of 9. That is, ignoring Myanmar. So the bottomline is, the sentiment of discrimination seems to linger in the majority of these countries where the minority muslims are given the right to have polygamous marriages. Some have suggested that this could be a jealousy, but there is no real evidence that every one in a country like England wishes to marry more than one lady. So if there is a jealousy in this counting, it could be with some very rich guy or an underworld don who wishes to have a small harem. And anyway that could be achieved easily with no law needed. So all of these theories seem lame. Is it fair to let the minority Muslims have a different law allowing polygeny or is it their right to have it?

What do you think of this situation? How do you judge this situation?

I think polygamy should not be allowed in any country, Muslim or Non-Muslim.
This is like saying, in Islam, girls can marry at 9 years old. Indeed in some Muslim countries girls can marry as young as 9.
So, now should other non-Muslim countries allow this Law for Muslims in their own country as well as for non-Muslims, or should they just abandon it?
Or, Homosexual marriages. In Islam it is not permitted. Should the Non-Muslims countries also disallow it to Muslims living in those countries, just because this is forbidden in Islam?
The answer is, the Law should be based on the Law of country and everyone treated equally. If polygamy is wrong it is to be forbidden for everyone, and if it is OK, it should be allowed to everyone. But in my opinion it is wrong.

 

[firedragon]

This is like saying, in Islam, girls can marry at 9 years old. Indeed in some Muslim countries girls can marry as old as 9.

Thats not polygamy. It is child marriage. A completely different topic. And you should know that not only muslim countries, many other countries dont have proper age limits for marriage. Please do open a new thread to discuss this if you have some knowledge on it. Thanks.

So, now should other non-Muslim countries allow this Law for Muslims in their own country as well as for non-Muslims, or should they just abandon it?
Or, Homosexual marriages. In Islam it is not permitted. Should the Non-Muslims countries also disallow it to Muslims living in those countries, just because this is forbidden in Islam?
The answer is, the Law should be based on the Law of country and everyone treated equally. If polygamy is wrong it is to be forbidden for everyone, and if it is OK, it should be allowed to everyone. But in my opinion it is wrong.

The question is, why should it be forbidden? Is it unfair? DO you understand the OP or maybe I have not asked the question clearly.

 

[sun rise]

But, the question is, is it fair to give muslims one law, and the rest of the community another law.

This is a broad question that stepping back from the polygamy aspect includes jizyah, the tax on non-Muslims in the Caliphate. Israel has different courts for personal matters based on religion.

So my general answer is that it's not fair by American standards of equal treatment under the law. The law and the treatment under the law should be the same for all.

But another question is whether or not strict fairness is true wisdom. I don't have an answer to that question.

So far, I have never come across a single country where "a significant number" have married many women and the other men didnt have women to get married to. never. I mean, I have never come across, any country, in history, ever.

I don't have any facts here but I do wonder about Mormons during the time when it was legal. For any that don't know the history Explaining polygamy and its history in the Mormon Church That practice is still alive today but I don't know how widespread it is. I do know that it's tolerated.

 

[firedragon]

I don't have any facts here but I do wonder about Mormons during the time when it was legal. For any that don't know the history Explaining polygamy and its history in the Mormon Church That practice is still alive today but I don't know how widespread it is. I do know that it's tolerated.

In the mormon community, polygamy is more widespread than any other community I have come across, even throughout history. But I don't have statistics for this. Nothing syndicated.

This is a broad question that stepping back from the polygamy aspect includes jizyah, the tax on non-Muslims in the Caliphate. Israel has different courts for personal matters based on religion.

So my general answer is that it's not fair by American standards of equal treatment under the law. The law and the treatment under the law should be the same for all.

But another question is whether or not strict fairness is true wisdom. I don't have an answer to that question.

The question then would be, is fairness for everyone to be equal, or is it fairness to let people be different. This is a topic that will have so much to think of.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Thats not polygamy. It is child marriage. A completely different topic. And you should know that not only muslim countries, many other countries dont have proper age limits for marriage. Please do open a new thread to discuss this if you have some knowledge on it. Thanks.



The question is, why should it be forbidden? Is it unfair? DO you understand the OP or maybe I have not asked the question clearly.

If the question is, why should it be forbidden, then I believe the only way to make it fair is, when the husband can love all his wives equally and treats then equally. As this is impossible, therefore it is unfair.

 

[firedragon]

If the question is, why should it be forbidden, then I believe the only way to make it fair is, when the husband can love all his wives equally and treats then equally. As this is impossible, therefore it is unfair.

That is not the question of the OP. Now I am thinking I have not written it properly.

 

[crossfire]

In a lot of countries due to an old UN intrusion the country would have a different law for religious minorities. In some countries it goes for even minority races. In places like India the so called "low caste" would get some government benefits the so called "higher caste" would not get. Some of them are a bit jealous. This kind of different systems exist in many countries, in many circumstances.

This particular thread is to explore the morality or the sensibility or what ever angle you would like to look at, the legality of polygamy.

Typically this would be polygeny because we are addressing Islam directly, and it is wide spread, global, and various countries with lets say, "secular laws", like India, England, etc would have a different law for non-muslims where polygamy is illegal, unlike muslims, and that polyandry is out of the question.

I remember reading some stats about India where thought Muslims are given the right to polygamy, non-muslims in India have polygamous marriages far more than muslims. But, the question is, is it fair to give muslims one law, and the rest of the community another law. Some of the Buddhist countries in Asia have been murderously against this law calling it discrimination towards the Buddhist majority. Some Buddhist monks have engaged in creating riots over these kind of things which developed into lynching and killing of several people including a child of 9. That is, ignoring Myanmar. So the bottomline is, the sentiment of discrimination seems to linger in the majority of these countries where the minority muslims are given the right to have polygamous marriages. Some have suggested that this could be a jealousy, but there is no real evidence that every one in a country like England wishes to marry more than one lady. So if there is a jealousy in this counting, it could be with some very rich guy or an underworld don who wishes to have a small harem. And anyway that could be achieved easily with no law needed. So all of these theories seem lame. Is it fair to let the minority Muslims have a different law allowing polygeny or is it their right to have it?

What do you think of this situation? How do you judge this situation?

It wouldn't happen in the United States. See Reynolds vs United States court case.

One finding of the court:

"Finally, the Court concluded that people cannot excuse themselves from the law because of their religion.

“Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances….”
​

 

[firedragon]

It wouldn't happen in the United States. See Reynolds vs United States court case.

Mormons.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'd stick with how it's currently handled in the West, where it's banned for all. Polygamy is horrible for women, children and young men who aren't able to marry as there aren't enough women available. Monogamous marriage has been demonstrated to have the best outcomes for all three.

That and who wants three or more nagging wives? ... or demanding husband's for that matter?

 

[Estro Felino]

Are you making that assessment based on something? What is your reasoning? Lets say Polyandry is legalised, it would not affect the muslims in a country like England or India (as an example).

I understand.
But the law is supposed to be the equal for all. Lex eadem omnibus.
You can be married to just one person.
So...even for gay people. A gay person can marry just one person. And he/she owes loyalty to his/her spouse.
It is the law.

 

[crossfire]

Mormons.

It is still illegal and they could still face prosecution for it.

 

[crossfire]

That and who wants three or more nagging wives? ... or demanding husband's for that matter?

Women who live together will have their menstrual cycles sync up with each other. A polygamous man would be subjected to PMS in stereo every month.

 

[firedragon]

It is still illegal and they could still face prosecution for it.

How about India? And England?

 

[firedragon]

I understand.
But the law is supposed to be the equal for all. Lex eadem omnibus.
You can be married to just one person.
So...even for gay people. A gay person can marry just one person. And he/she owes loyalty to his/her spouse.
It is the law.

Is there some hindrance or a violation of rights if polygamy is given to a particular community or religion? Do you understand what I am saying?

Its not that I disagree with you.

 

[JustGeorge]

Okay. So if the government makes polyandry legal, what then? Muslims generally have no polyandry laws, so, it won't affect them in any way. What do you think?

I think if a law was made making polygamy/polyandry legal, it should be independently done without consideration of one's religious status. Though someone may wish to have multiple spouses due to a religious allowance, if it were to be made a law, the reason would have to(in order to be fair) not take religion into consideration.

If its allowable for some, its allowable for all. Or, as it stands in many countries currently, its allowable for none.

 

[firedragon]

I think if a law was made making polygamy/polyandry legal, it should be independently done without consideration of one's religious status. Though someone may wish to have multiple spouses due to a religious allowance, if it were to be made a law, the reason would have to(in order to be fair) not take religion into consideration.

If its allowable for some, its allowable for all. Or, as it stands in many countries currently, its allowable for none.

In many countries, it is legal for Muslims.

Anyway, why do you think its unfair? What are the repercussions of that kind of legal system?

 

[JustGeorge]

In many countries, it is legal for Muslims.

Anyway, why do you think its unfair? What are the repercussions of that kind of legal system?

I don't really believe government and religion should mix. Which is why I think that if multiple spouses were allowable to some groups, it should be allowable for all.

I also think if a government said "alright, Muslims/Mormons/Pastafarians may have X amount of spouses", you'd get a mess of people falsely claiming to be a member of those religions to take advantage of that. I think that, in the long run, that would also have negative consequences for those religious communities in which it was allowed.

 

[Clara Tea]

In a lot of countries due to an old UN intrusion the country would have a different law for religious minorities. In some countries it goes for even minority races. In places like India the so called "low caste" would get some government benefits the so called "higher caste" would not get. Some of them are a bit jealous. This kind of different systems exist in many countries, in many circumstances.

This particular thread is to explore the morality or the sensibility or what ever angle you would like to look at, the legality of polygamy.

Typically this would be polygeny because we are addressing Islam directly, and it is wide spread, global, and various countries with lets say, "secular laws", like India, England, etc would have a different law for non-muslims where polygamy is illegal, unlike muslims, and that polyandry is out of the question.

I remember reading some stats about India where thought Muslims are given the right to polygamy, non-muslims in India have polygamous marriages far more than muslims. But, the question is, is it fair to give muslims one law, and the rest of the community another law. Some of the Buddhist countries in Asia have been murderously against this law calling it discrimination towards the Buddhist majority. Some Buddhist monks have engaged in creating riots over these kind of things which developed into lynching and killing of several people including a child of 9. That is, ignoring Myanmar. So the bottomline is, the sentiment of discrimination seems to linger in the majority of these countries where the minority muslims are given the right to have polygamous marriages. Some have suggested that this could be a jealousy, but there is no real evidence that every one in a country like England wishes to marry more than one lady. So if there is a jealousy in this counting, it could be with some very rich guy or an underworld don who wishes to have a small harem. And anyway that could be achieved easily with no law needed. So all of these theories seem lame. Is it fair to let the minority Muslims have a different law allowing polygeny or is it their right to have it?

What do you think of this situation? How do you judge this situation?

Polygamists should be punished by.....hmm......being married to many women.

I'm thinking of the Star Trek Episode "Mudd I" in which Harcourt Fenton Mudd made robots to wait on him hand and foot. When the crew of the Enterprise left, they had programmed at least 500 duplicates of his nagging wife (that was his inspiration to explore deep space in the first place), and they didn't allow an "off switch."

Abe Lincoln didn't accept Utah as a state until they got rid of polygamy (a common practice among Mormons up to that point). Mormon women were fine with polygamy because they didn't have to be burdened with constant sex, they were well taken care of, and the various kids were taken care of by the entire group (never a time when they were left alone). The kids had the love of several mommies, and could pick and choose which were their favorites.

Does The Bible Allow Polygamy? The Complete Answer

The website above, says that Jews were originally allowed to have polygamy, but Christians are not.

Just to be clear, polygamy is marriage to a giant parrot, right? (The cracker bill must be fierce).

Someone asked if it is bigamy....I said....no, big of them.

If a man could marry many women, there must have been some men who had none.

If wealth allowed them to marry many women, it seems that women could be bought (almost prostitution).

I don't suppose that STDs were much of a problem as long as everyone was faithful to their own group.

In the Mormon religion, it was common for some wives to be for sex, and others for taking care of the house, for which they were allowed to stay in the household, and get clothed and fed (seems like a cheap housekeeper arrangement).

Hippies had shared mates in communes, and they didn't seem abused, nor did the children who often had more children of their own at early ages. After taking a few unknown pills from unknown people, such arrangements didn't seem bad (nor the pink elephant that you married--maybe we should suggest a diet plan?).

The Manson murderous clan often went naked and had sex with anyone, including under-aged minors. I wonder if we should factor in their morality? I wonder what Reverend Tex Watson preaches today? If you scramble the letters of "Tex Watson," you get "atones."

If you scramble the letters of "Britney Spears," you get "Presbyterian" and "stripteaser."

All this makes me think that God is playing games with names....sending us a code.

 

[Clara Tea]

I don't really believe government and religion should mix. Which is why I think that if multiple spouses were allowable to some groups, it should be allowable for all.

I also think if a government said "alright, Muslims/Mormons/Pastafarians may have X amount of spouses", you'd get a mess of people falsely claiming to be a member of those religions to take advantage of that. I think that, in the long run, that would also have negative consequences for those religious communities in which it was allowed.

American women sometimes marry Muslims, then move to their countries and find that they are not their only wives, and find that they are prisoners who can't leave and are beaten. Women are property, and often not allowed to get educations.

 

[JustGeorge]

American women sometimes marry Muslims, then move to their countries and find that they are not their only wives, and find that they are prisoners who can't leave and are beaten. Women are property, and often not allowed to get educations.

It does sometimes happen.

Though sometimes American women marry Muslim men, and live happily ever after, too.

Each case is different. Some will face horror and abuse. Some will have beautiful relationships. Others will be average, and some will end in divorce.

A lot of scenarios out there...