PDA

View Full Version : Gay equality, now what of Polygamy?



garhkal
12-17-2013, 07:14 PM
Well in many of the threads we had at the beginning of the year on the DOMA strikedown and other articles of news in relation to the increase in gay rights states many against it said it would lead to more push from Polygamists to recognize and legalize their status..
Guess they were right.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/16/opinion/goldfeder-polygamy-laws/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

imnohero
12-17-2013, 08:57 PM
Try reading the actual judges ruling... https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?211cv0652-78

And you might want to actually read the article the opinion piece is based on... http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/index.html

Only in the most simple sense is your statement correct... yes, some people meme'd "the fall of DOMA is the rise of [insert cause here]"...and this case is about polygamy, one of the 'evils' that people said would spread far and wide, along with beastiality, child porn, child abuse, Islam, and whatever other bigotry or bias they have. So yea, polygamy is being discussed following the SCOTUS ruling on DOMA. It was being discussed before the ruling, too, whether you were aware of it or not. In point of fact, the very lawsuit in the opinion piece, is from 2 years ago, long before the DOMA ruling.

kool-aid
12-17-2013, 09:12 PM
They should legalize polygamy. Why not? Who does it hurt any more than legalizing gay marriage. Love is love :rolleyes1:

sandsjames
12-17-2013, 09:23 PM
They should legalize polygamy. Why not? Who does it hurt any more than legalizing gay marriage. Love is love :rolleyes1:

Agree...if all are consenting adults, then who's to say how many people should be involved.

Cookie Monster
12-17-2013, 10:03 PM
But...it's weird...and I want to legislate my morals upon other people...

TJMAC77SP
12-17-2013, 10:29 PM
Try reading the actual judges ruling... https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?211cv0652-78

And you might want to actually read the article the opinion piece is based on... http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/index.html

Only in the most simple sense is your statement correct... yes, some people meme'd "the fall of DOMA is the rise of [insert cause here]"...and this case is about polygamy, one of the 'evils' that people said would spread far and wide, along with beastiality, child porn, child abuse, Islam, and whatever other bigotry or bias they have. So yea, polygamy is being discussed following the SCOTUS ruling on DOMA. It was being discussed before the ruling, too, whether you were aware of it or not. In point of fact, the very lawsuit in the opinion piece, is from 2 years ago, long before the DOMA ruling.

I wouldn't argue there was probably a desire to stir the pot a little but the basis of the prohibition on polygamy is identical to the prohibition on same-sex marriage so it can't be dismissed quite as easily (with any credibility that is) by lumping it into other acts and practices viewed as an anathema in our society.

imnohero
12-17-2013, 11:08 PM
I wouldn't argue there was probably a desire to stir the pot a little but the basis of the prohibition on polygamy is identical to the prohibition on same-sex marriage so it can't be dismissed quite as easily (with any credibility that is) by lumping it into other acts and practices viewed as an anathema in our society.

Exactly, so when it is (lumped together) by opponents, it's fairly difficult to take them seriously.

garhkal
12-18-2013, 02:22 AM
And since people are saying with Gay marriage its no longer Anthema, why should Polygamy still be that way.

imnohero
12-18-2013, 02:34 AM
Libby Copeland over at slate.com has a really good article, with referenced links supporting her statements that covers much of the answer to your question:

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html

The "bottom line" at the end of the article:
Polygamy may actually exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender that hurt societies, even if the institution itself appears neutral.

AJBIGJ
12-18-2013, 03:57 AM
Simple stance on it, if you like the idea, as do any who choose to congregate in such an arrangement, try it out and see if it actually works. If so, enjoy it as such, if not Goddamn that could be a ridiculous amount of alimony!

4CECMC
12-18-2013, 05:44 AM
Sure - and just where do you draw the line in the sand - pedophilia, animals? Sickening!

USN - Retired
12-18-2013, 07:50 AM
Libby Copeland over at slate.com has a really good article, with referenced links supporting her statements that covers much of the answer to your question:

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html

The "bottom line" at the end of the article:



Why are we focusing only on polygamy?

If we were to abolish all marriage, including monogamy, and make any type of heterosexual cohabitation illegal, then the DV rate would drop to zero. Wouldn't a DV rate near zero be a good thing?

Does the institution of monogamous marriage itself also exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender that hurts our society, even if the institution itself appears neutral?

Cookie Monster
12-18-2013, 09:27 AM
Sure - and just where do you draw the line in the sand - pedophilia, animals? Sickening!

This is about what consenting adults do with each other. Why lump them in with pedophiles and Chickenlover?

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-18-2013, 11:15 AM
They should legalize polygamy. Why not? Who does it hurt any more than legalizing gay marriage. Love is love :rolleyes1:

Especially when research has proven that 2 parents are better than one, why wouldnt 5 parents be better than 2?

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-18-2013, 11:16 AM
But...it's weird...and I want to legislate my morals upon other people...

As long as people keep calling for the government to ordaine even straight marriages, people's morals will always be thrust upon one another.

TJMAC77SP
12-18-2013, 01:08 PM
Libby Copeland over at slate.com has a really good article, with referenced links supporting her statements that covers much of the answer to your question:

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html

The "bottom line" at the end of the article:

While it is an interesting opinion piece the actual bottom line is that the lifestyles are similar in relation to social taboos and a similar argument over the harm to society could be made about same-sex marriage (on a biological level). I personally agree with the article’s premise that polygamy is bad for society on a macro level. If it were to become very wide spread practiced by a large percentage. The same argument would hold true of same sex marriage. I don’t envision either of those eventualities so this is an intellectual argument but the similarity is there nonetheless.

I think this sheds a light on agendas at work here. I am not judging one side or the other but the pro same-sex marriage side will naturally balk at this argument and dismiss it (often by the lumping with other distasteful predilections as seen earlier). I find this intellectually disingenuous.

It is similar to the pro-abortion crowd balking at a law requiring an ultrasound to anyone desiring an abortion. They cry about it being an invasive procedure but don't mention the details of what the abortion itself will entail. Talk about invasive. We all know what the real reason for the argument in both cases and the ones presented to the public just aren't honest.

AJBIGJ
12-18-2013, 02:34 PM
Sure - and just where do you draw the line in the sand - pedophilia, animals? Sickening!
I would leave the "line" to the discretion of the individuals officiating the marriage. Historically, the age of majority hasn't always been 18 in every culture throughout the world, society seemed to truck along just fine when such was the case. I don't see too many out there who would actively agree to being the officiating authority for a bestial marriage, it would probably be bad for business because the 99.99999% of people who do not condone such relationships probably would not seek the services of that individual in the future.

DocBones
12-18-2013, 03:45 PM
So, some guy marries a bunch of ladies. Then they all figure out that he is really a creep, and they all divorce him.

I imagine paying out 5 or 10 alimonies and many many child supports would be kind of a wake up call to other guys contemplating multimarriages.

Or one lady marries a bunch of guys, divorces them, and collects so much alimony that she becomes the richest lady in America.

Or somebody marries his cats, dogs, horses and goldfish, and he gets time off from work, every time one of them dies.

Or Michael Jackson comes back to life, and marries a bunch of Bubble look alike under aged monkeys.

Or ...

I must stop thinking about this. The range of multimarriages is endless!

RetC141BFCC
12-18-2013, 04:03 PM
One wife is bad enough bitching and complaining. Can you imagine coming home from a night out with your buddies and have two or 3 wives bitching at you? Just remember that time of month when woman live together there cycles sync up. NO THANK YOU

SomeRandomGuy
12-18-2013, 04:11 PM
Why do we always think of polygamy as one man married to a bunch of women? Have you guys not been paying attention to the women's rights movement? Personally, I'm hoping polygamy becomes legalized and I can marry into a family that is 1 woman and like 15 husbands. Hopefully, one of them will be rich enough to support the rest of us and I will just be a house husband who plays video games and gets drunk all day.

garhkal
12-18-2013, 06:53 PM
Does the institution of monogamous marriage itself also exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender that hurts our society, even if the institution itself appears neutral?

Well lets see.
Bigger tax breaks for being married, check
More companies seem to feel married folk make better managers, therefore advance people on that precept. check
Military get several benefits based on marital status. Check.

So yes to me monogamous marriage itself exacrebates inequality.

raider8169
12-18-2013, 07:03 PM
Just wait until they are 5 husbands and 5 wifes all with like 15 kids. Yeah I getting out of a bad marriage as it is could you imagine trying to divorce 9 people at once? Just get rid of marriage all together.

SomeRandomGuy
12-18-2013, 07:17 PM
Just wait until they are 5 husbands and 5 wifes all with like 15 kids. Yeah I getting out of a bad marriage as it is could you imagine trying to divorce 9 people at once? Just get rid of marriage all together.

This sounds awesome to me. Do community property laws apply in a huge marriage? What if only one person wants out? Do the rest have to buy them out? As long as there are financial incentives to be gained through marriage we would be better off treating it like any other business arrangment. We already call marriage a partnership right? Polygamy just allows corporations.

bombsquadron6
12-18-2013, 07:52 PM
Living in Utah you get used to stuff like this federal court decision. Judge Clark Waddoups is a Mormon and in my opinion isn't exactly unbiased about this issue. I could go on and on but I have to go to work. Jeez, you should hear me after a few beers. Booze and polygamy and Utah. Grist for the joke mill.......

raider8169
12-18-2013, 08:39 PM
This sounds awesome to me. Do community property laws apply in a huge marriage? What if only one person wants out? Do the rest have to buy them out? As long as there are financial incentives to be gained through marriage we would be better off treating it like any other business arrangment. We already call marriage a partnership right? Polygamy just allows corporations.

lol you make it sound positive. But really, you show up late and hold up 30 people from eating dinner than have 5 chicks whining to you plus a couple dudes? Na Im good. Than you have to switch beds every night to make sure you spend that time with everyone otherwise you need to buy a few king size beds so everyone can be in it. Seriously the possibilities are endless but I couldnt deal with it.

sandsjames
12-19-2013, 11:59 AM
Well lets see.
Bigger tax breaks for being married, check
More companies seem to feel married folk make better managers, therefore advance people on that precept. check
Military get several benefits based on marital status. Check.

So yes to me monogamous marriage itself exacrebates inequality.

So, in order to avoid this, take away all financial benefits for being married. Said it a thousand times. Everyone gets single person pay, files single, etc. All problems solved and nobody is left out.

sandsjames
12-19-2013, 12:02 PM
Just wait until they are 5 husbands and 5 wifes all with like 15 kids. Yeah I getting out of a bad marriage as it is could you imagine trying to divorce 9 people at once? Just get rid of marriage all together.

Don't get rid of marriage, just get rid of it as it related to government. If my wife and I want to go through a ceremony by our chosen "minister" then we are married, and that should be good for us. I don't care if the government wants to recognize it at all. I don't care about the "benefits" afforded me because I choose to "formalize" my relationship with my significant other.

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-19-2013, 12:16 PM
Well lets see.
Bigger tax breaks for being married, checkDepends on the situation. I will have the best tax break this year for being a single father.

More companies seem to feel married folk make better managers, therefore advance people on that precept. checkYou have proof of this?

Military get several benefits based on marital status. Check. Maybe in the officer world. Enlisted dont get promoted based on married life.

So yes to me monogamous marriage itself exacrebates inequality.
How about those people that are single, do they not have the freedom to work more and harder to gain the life style in which they want to be in?

raider8169
12-19-2013, 03:04 PM
Depends on the situation. I will have the best tax break this year for being a single father.
You have proof of this?
Maybe in the officer world. Enlisted dont get promoted based on married life.

How about those people that are single, do they not have the freedom to work more and harder to gain the life style in which they want to be in?

Not really proof but companies see married parents as best, because they need to job more and are less liekly to jump ships or to move or anything else that would cause the company to lose an employee. It makes sense but if everyone was in the same boat than at least the best person for the job would likely get it or else they would find a different way to compare individuals. We fix one problem and another arises.

garhkal
12-19-2013, 06:49 PM
So, in order to avoid this, take away all financial benefits for being married. Said it a thousand times. Everyone gets single person pay, files single, etc. All problems solved and nobody is left out.

My sentiments exactly. Now if we could just get a certain game show (Wheel of fortune) to see that smacking on singles (especially single males) is wrong too.


You have proof of this?

Just what i have been told at almost a Dozen job fairs WJ..


Maybe in the officer world. Enlisted dont get promoted based on married life.

Did i say anything about promotions? No i said benefits. Whether FSA, higher BAH etc, or just getting preferential treatment for time off.

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-19-2013, 07:04 PM
Just what i have been told at almost a Dozen job fairs WJ..Interesting. I guess I just see that singles would be more hard core about promotion and would have the ability to take extra time getting a head than the married folk. But then again, those that are married may strive to be better because they have someone else depeneding on them. Both sides seem to have their own merits.


Did i say anything about promotions? No i said benefits. Whether FSA, higher BAH etc, or just getting preferential treatment for time off.
Yes to the BAH. I guess if everyone lived on base, then everyone would need the same size house that could fit the largest family on base.

I forget what is FSA?

Preferential treatment for time off? How so? When I was married, I didnt get time off just cause. Nor did it stop me from working odd shifts. As a single father, I only get to shift my work schedule by an hour just becuase there are no daycares that open so early. The report time here is insanely early.

garhkal
12-20-2013, 08:29 PM
I forget what is FSA?

Family separation allowance. Since everyone has family (other than single children who were orphans) it should apply to all, but only applies to those who are married/with dependents.



Preferential treatment for time off? How so? When I was married, I didnt get time off just cause. Nor did it stop me from working odd shifts. As a single father, I only get to shift my work schedule by an hour just becuase there are no daycares that open so early. The report time here is insanely early.

Twice i had leave cancelled on me, cause of manning, and both times it was cause someone married had to go on leave (family issue, but not emergency leave worthy), so i, being single was selected to 'suck it up so they could go'.
I have heard of well over a dozen others who had the same thing happen.
Getting off early / whole days to take wife/kid to this or that place for appointments with NO need to put in a spec liberty chit (which if us single folk needed to do we would have to do the chit for)..
ALL those to me showcase a preferential treatment for married folk.