Polygamy, Your thoughts.
Replies
-
Dont care either way, i couldnt do it cause id slap the skin off another woman if she touched my fiance but if you can hack it and it makes you happy, why not?
Consenting adults, it shouldnt be an issue. & i'd better not see some crazy religious people in here talking crap cause polygamy was in the bible there was many biblical men who had a ridiculous amount of wives.
The End.0 -
Its treated like a double standard. Its ok for men to have several women....that's been going on since before ancient time..... but its looked upon as disgusting to have one woman with several men. Not MY double standard.....but it exists. We still have a long way to go to achieve total equality.0
-
This is in response to Kris... I am not sure how to respond by the quote.
My husband and I have actually had serious talks about having one or 2 more women into our relationship. Nothing to do with religion but for other reasons. 1 or 2 more incomes in the home, 1 or 2 more people to clean, cook, do laundry, yard work whatever. My husband works 16-20 hours a day 7 days a week spring and fall with working 5 days a week 16-20 hrs a day in the summer; so during his busy time it is overwhelming for me to take care of our 4br 4 bath 3 finished story home, yard work and our 9+ pets. The new women wouldn't have any children coming into the relationship nor be having any more children once they are with us. I would ALWAYS be the HBIC and what I say goes! For us, perfect!
However, that being said, I have one child and he has 3 and we wouldn't want our kids to be confused about what's going on, so that's why we haven't done it. I'm sure we could find a way to explain it to them but with our ex's involved until our kids are all 18, it's just not the drama we want to deal with. So in 14 years...this might be a real thing for us, until then perhaps I can rescue a illegal sex slave or something like that, give her a bedroom and let her live with us for free and all she has to do is cook and clean and laundry...hhhmmmmmmm imagine that!
If he works that much hire the help! This is in response to the one named Kris
As far as I'm concerned it's none of my business, wouldn't do and I believe the Bible. I don't have to judge one day we will all answer for our own life. I have enough to do to keep myself and my own business in line. To each his own. That's my 2 cents worth.
I do hire help for the yard but the house, I don't like strangers in my house messing with my things.0 -
Doesn't matter what we think, opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. Personally, I miss the keep it simple mind frame, no one is satisfied, everyone is always trying to push the limits a little farther. Soon folks will be complaining because they can't marry thier dog/cat or a doll. These topics always become heated because someone always disagrees and then a dramatic thread unfolds with people being rude and telling that person how stupid and close minded they are. SMH, people have lost the ability to respectfully agree to disagree.
Because some people equate polyamory with bestiality. It's kind of..what's the phrase..unbelievably offensive.0 -
Because what makes some people happy isn't good for the whole. We have an obligation to protect children of society. I think impact studies can be important. I don't think it's fair to say, "Well, this isn't any worse than a drunk, abusive father". Of course a drunk, abusive father is harmful to the children, and we've created laws to protect children from that (not that CPS always works). Because of impact studies, we know that males growing up with a single mother are at certain disadvantages, so we have "Big Brother" programs and other similar programs so society can help. Just because a mom is happy slapping her kid upside the back of his head doesn't mean I'm not going to say something to her. You ask what "right" I have to say anything. I look at it as an obligation.how about we just let people choose to love one another in the way that makes them happiest? What right do we have to do anything else?0 -
The reason you could not share your husband ... you were raised with the "notion" that it's OK for a woman to have a positive sense of self worth. It's OK for you to feel that your are equal to a man.
Girls raised in polygamy are not taught this. If a woman who share's her husband is jealous ... the woman has a problem. She's the bad guy. It's not like "Big Love" ... girls raised in this environment are taught they are second class citizens.
that is also how girls are raised in the middle east, even Mexice (the oldest boy of the family gets no discipline and is revered) it's someone else's culture. I feel lucky I was born in america, I feel lucky I was raised Wiccan and not brainwashed by a Christian family - there's many who don't agree with that. Everyone will never agree on everything.
Wow. Brainwashed? I am a Christian and am raising my children in a Christian environment. The main point of Christianity is love. We are to love our neighbor as ourselves-and our neighbor is anyone/everyone. That doesn't mean I have to love everyone's choices (that's called discernment-not judgmental). I do not think I am brainwashing my children. They certainly have the freedom to choose what they believe or don't believe.
^^ This ^^ Although, while children do have freedoms on their beliefs, I will strive to raise my child to be obedient to God. He is the creator of this universe, the one who gave us life. "But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Joshua 24:15)
From my personal encounters on these forums in the past [almost] full year, not many believe in God. So I type this response with the understanding I will get a lot of replies scoffing at my words, and I am okay with that. I stand strong enough on my faith in JESUS that nothing thrown my way on here will shake my faith.0 -
While I'm not really a huge fan of polygamy and my first thought is "what about the children???", I think the government needs to stay out of the bedrooms of legally consenting adults.
At the end of the day, as long as nobody is being hurt, I have no problem. Your relationship is YOURS, my relationship is MINE, and as long as everybody's happy and healthy, no need to impose my way of doing things onto anybody else.0 -
I want us to get another wife!!! Id love to have someone else to help raise the children and I want a big family. I feel like kids raised by a communal effort are better for it, there are ways that I dont do things and someone else does that would be beneficial to the kids. However I don't think I could share my husband. I get pretty jealous. I love the idea of it forcing you to deal with your jealousy issues though I feel if I could work through them Id be a better person.
Im all for it ( except in the crazy cases like 1 creepy 50 year old man marries 15 ladies and has tons of kids with them then marries and impregnates all the daughters, yeah thats obv not ok)0 -
If you don't like these threads or our debates, you really don't have to read them.Doesn't matter what we think, opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. Personally, I miss the keep it simple mind frame, no one is satisfied, everyone is always trying to push the limits a little farther. Soon folks will be complaining because they can't marry thier dog/cat or a doll. These topics always become heated because someone always disagrees and then a dramatic thread unfolds with people being rude and telling that person how stupid and close minded they are. SMH, people have lost the ability to respectfully agree to disagree.0 -
Its a crock
When I see one WOMAN, with 10 husbands I'll believe it. Persoanlly the people always look like it would be better for the human race if they didn;t mate at all. We have enough crossed hicks surely?0 -
Doesn't matter what we think, opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. Personally, I miss the keep it simple mind frame, no one is satisfied, everyone is always trying to push the limits a little farther. Soon folks will be complaining because they can't marry thier dog/cat or a doll. These topics always become heated because someone always disagrees and then a dramatic thread unfolds with people being rude and telling that person how stupid and close minded they are. SMH, people have lost the ability to respectfully agree to disagree.
Because some people equate polyamory with bestiality. It's kind of..what's the phrase..unbelievably offensive.
Then be unbelievably offended sir...again, my opinion, you have yours and I can care less about it.0 -
i dont have a problem with it unless its one of those crazy cult commuities that forces young girls into marriage. but families like the "sister wives"? hell yeah! they arent hurting anybody or breaking any laws. if thats what they want the do it! and i dont think anybody has a say in how people choose to live their lives, as long as nobody gets hurt in the process.
0 -
One daddy and one mommy is not the best way to raise a child. How can I say this? Easy. Give me one drunk, abusive daddy and one enabling mommy and there goes your theory. It has to be done on an individual, case by case basis.
While true, the problem is you can't make social policy (laws) that work on an individual basis. The line has to be drawn somewhere to apply to everyone. People who say "the government should stay away" don't seem to understand that the law HAS to be written otherwise someone IS going to break it.
Case in point - everyone here seems to agree thinks that "18" is the magic age for being an adult, when the age of consent is 15-17 in the US, lower in other countries, and marriage laws are still very different. Like it or not, that *is* the government getting involved in enforcing the law.
Well here's where we really flip the script.
Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None.
For purposes of a census exam? I'm sure the forms can be slightly modified without riots in the streets.
If there is no law, no one is breaking it. Marriage is a decision for individuals to make. The state has no business in it.0 -
what is cracking me up here is everyone assuming the relationship would be one man with multiple wives. I have friends in my life where it is one woman and two men. It's not about the men sharing the woman. They all love (and enjoy) each other equally.
Now that might work!...LOL0 -
Soon folks will be complaining because they can't marry thier dog/cat or a doll.
I think this is funny, and not because of you said it. I just saw a commercial where a guy marries a hamburger, and then eats it. I think it was for Windys. totally grossed me out.0 -
I personally couldn't be just another wife. lol But I was watching the show Sister Wives on Sunday and they were trying to get 4 home loans. What got me thinking is this.....3 of the wives had to apply for a loan as a SINGLE mother. I wonder how they like being called SINGLE mothers when in their eyes and their religion they are married.0
-
Honestly, it would not work for me but I can not judge others, as long as it doesn't bring harm to anyone then why not....0
-
Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None. For purposes of a census exam? I'm sure the forms can be slightly modified without riots in the streets. If there is no law, no one is breaking it. Marriage is a decision for individuals to make. The state has no business in it.
Are you saying marriage should be abolished entirely? There are a zillion things tied up in marriage law - property benefits, power of attorney, paternity, inheritance to spouse and kin. How do you get rid of all that stuff?
Or are you saying government has no power to define who marries who, even if it is multiple people? Who's going to write the laws to split up inheritance between 3 husbands and 2 wives? It gets mind-bogglingly complex very fast once you go past two people!0 -
Honestly, I would welcome the extra help around the house. But, I wouldn't want to share my husband, therefore not an option for me.
I think they call them housekeepers...0 -
I don't have a problem with it as long as the people are of age and it is their decision to enter into this type of lifestyle. I am actually quite intriged and watch sister wives every week.0
-
Well, it used to be that a man and woman received incentives to marry because government wanted to promote the growth of families. It was thought that the "best" type of family unit was both a married father and mother raising their own children. It was thought that "healthier" children came from that type of family unit (assuming it was a healthy marriage), and were better future members of society. So, to encourage that type of family unit, tax breaks were given. The question we have now is: What is the "best" type of family unit for raising children? How do we know? Well, how about we do a study on positive, adult members of society and see how they were raised? Impact studies, again.Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None.0 -
Because what makes some people happy isn't good for the whole. We have an obligation to protect children of society. I think impact studies can be important. I don't think it's fair to say, "Well, this isn't any worse than a drunk, abusive father". Of course a drunk, abusive father is harmful to the children, and we've created laws to protect children from that (not that CPS always works). Because of impact studies, we know that males growing up with a single mother are at certain disadvantages, so we have "Big Brother" programs and other similar programs so society can help. Just because a mom is happy slapping her kid upside the back of his head doesn't mean I'm not going to say something to her. You ask what "right" I have to say anything. I look at it as an obligation.how about we just let people choose to love one another in the way that makes them happiest? What right do we have to do anything else?
But we are a society focused on the freedoms of the individual, our right to pursue happiness. We do not view ourselves as a collective in this country. The rights of the individual have always been upheld as very important, at least in the U.S.
As I said before, those studies are useless becase this isn't science. It has to be individual. I was raised by a single mother and came out better than many who were raised by two parents. Does that make the study invalid? If it were hard science it would have to.
Yes you should say something to a mother slapping her kid upside the head. A few years back (and still today) that would not be the opinion. That would have been an example of the "Basic Family Values" that were mentioned earlier. So clearly we see, what we thought we knew was wrong, why think we now know exactly how children should be raised?
Most people are just trying to do the best they can. If they want a few partners to do it with I have zero problem with that. All I ask is that they don't hurt the kids.0 -
Just my luck that I would get 4 women to go along with this idea and then their TOM didn't synch up. Every week there would be one woman p*ssed off.
LMAO That's what I was thinking!0 -
Well, it used to be that a man and woman received incentives to marry because government wanted to promote the growth of families. It was thought that the "best" type of family unit was both a married father and mother raising their own children. It was thought that "healthier" children came from that type of family unit (assuming it was a healthy marriage), and were better future members of society. So, to encourage that type of family unit, tax breaks were given. The question we have now is: What is the "best" type of family unit for raising children? How do we know? Well, how about we do a study on positive, adult members of society and see how they were raised? Impact studies, again.Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None.
They are useless studies. You know why?
What happens to parents who don't meet the studies example of "best family unit"? Are the children taken away? Are single mothers forbidden from getting pregnant or raising kids. No. Nothing happens. The studies just get used in arguments like this one. They are useless.0 -
This is my only point of contention. We all have an obligation to protect the children. We cannot just say that how children are raised is only the business of the parents. I don't know that children being raised by homosexual or polygamist parents are harmed psychologically. I'm not suggesting they are. I'm saying we don't know yet.But we are a society focused on the freedoms of the individual, our right to pursue happiness. We do not view ourselves as a collective in this country. The rights of the individual have always been upheld as very important, at least in the U.S.0 -
One daddy and one mommy is not the best way to raise a child. How can I say this? Easy. Give me one drunk, abusive daddy and one enabling mommy and there goes your theory. It has to be done on an individual, case by case basis.
While true, the problem is you can't make social policy (laws) that work on an individual basis. The line has to be drawn somewhere to apply to everyone. People who say "the government should stay away" don't seem to understand that the law HAS to be written otherwise someone IS going to break it.
Case in point - everyone here seems to agree thinks that "18" is the magic age for being an adult, when the age of consent is 15-17 in the US, lower in other countries, and marriage laws are still very different. Like it or not, that *is* the government getting involved in enforcing the law.
In the US, 18 is the age in which men have to sign up for the draft, and adults in general can vote and sign contracts. It is also considered the "age of majority" in dealing with statutory rape cases (if one party is under 18 and the other is over, the older one is guilty of statutory rape, pretty much regardless of the circumstances (some states have other things, such as age difference, but this is the basics of it)). These are the general matters when talking about things like marriage and sexual relationships (marriage, as far as the government is concerned, is a meta-contract, and thus requires the signers to be 18 or have consent from a legal guardian).
Also, you can't break laws that don't exist.0 -
I know we normally think about a man with a number of wife's, but what about a woman have more then 1 husband?
That is polyandry. I've seen on TV that is does exist as well!
Personally, I say if that is what people want, and they are adults and consenting, no one else should be able to say otherwise, least of all the gov't.0 -
Sorry, all this "save the children" stuff by keeping them close minded and closeted is ridiculous. What we are basically stating is that the Western Civilization way is the only way. Matriarchal societies exist throughout the world, and a lot of them are polygamous. And yet all I've seen throughout the thread is how it only benefits men and how men can't be shared.
The other thought is that one mommy and one daddy is the natural way to raise your kids. Some cultures the entire community raises the children as part of the community. For us to chastise this as wrong just seems a bit conceited to me. I've seen lots of messed up kids, myself included, that had one mom and one dad. In addition to this, the fact that the divorce rate is in double digits should tell you, as an individual, and us, as a society, that marriage isn't for everyone. At least not in it's current state.0 -
Well, it used to be that a man and woman received incentives to marry because government wanted to promote the growth of families. It was thought that the "best" type of family unit was both a married father and mother raising their own children. It was thought that "healthier" children came from that type of family unit (assuming it was a healthy marriage), and were better future members of society. So, to encourage that type of family unit, tax breaks were given. The question we have now is: What is the "best" type of family unit for raising children? How do we know? Well, how about we do a study on positive, adult members of society and see how they were raised? Impact studies, again.Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None.
So... should married couples who are not having children not receive tax breaks?0 -
Well, it used to be that a man and woman received incentives to marry because government wanted to promote the growth of families. It was thought that the "best" type of family unit was both a married father and mother raising their own children. It was thought that "healthier" children came from that type of family unit (assuming it was a healthy marriage), and were better future members of society. So, to encourage that type of family unit, tax breaks were given. The question we have now is: What is the "best" type of family unit for raising children? How do we know? Well, how about we do a study on positive, adult members of society and see how they were raised? Impact studies, again.Why does government have to have ANY say in marriage? I'm serious. Any. There should be no tax breaks or considerations for married couples (or groups in this discussion). People are free to get married, they do it constantly, there's no reason for a tax incentive. None.
They are useless studies. You know why?
What happens to parents who don't meet the studies example of "best family unit"? Are the children taken away? Are single mothers forbidden from getting pregnant or raising kids. No. Nothing happens. The studies just get used in arguments like this one. They are useless.
Exactly... and any law based on a "study" that incorporated the "assumption [of] a healthy marriage" is not very scientifically sound. How do you screen families to assure their "health" before giving tax breaks?
Now anyone can get married and have kids and get the tax breaks, "healthy marriage" or not.
Just because something was put in place 50+ years ago doesn't mean it should still be the way things work today...0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions