The debate "Decriminalise polygyny" was started by
June 13, 2017, 1:25 pm.
2 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 6 people are on the disagree side.
There needs to be more votes to see what the common perception is.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
thereal posted 6 arguments, Sumerian posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 4 arguments, neveralone posted 2 arguments, Sumerian posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 4 arguments to the disagreers part.
thereal and 1 visitor agree.
Nemiroff, Sumerian, PsychDave, neveralone and 2 visitors disagree.
First, your religion is not law. Sorry to break it to you, but the rest of society doesn't particularly care what you think. That is the point of the separation of church and state. Your religious prejudices don't get to dictate how others can live.
I'm not sure how you think people find a spouse, but they generally aren't "provided" by anyone. Women are people, so they are free to decide who they want to marry and don't need to be granted.
Finally, I'm not sure what travel has to do with anything. Please, try to form a coherent argument.
How can you decriminalize what you have no authority to grant in the first place?
Your false gods would first need some cooperative women to provide to a man as his wives in the first place, oh pirate.
Would the wives you don't even have to give; then be subject to traveling the planet when and where your false gods give permission to travel?
That is in no way connected to the debate topic. Could you please at least pretend to have a coherent point of view?
A homosexual man is not allowed to have happy wives.
They are only allowed one, and get caught by even that one.
No one else is discussing homosexuality, so it is in no way relevant.
Lots of people disagree with having multiple spouses for a variety of reasons, as this discussion has shown. Some for moral reasons, feeling it wrong. Some for religious reasons, as their faith prohibits it. Some, like myself, for practical reasons, as I outlined.
Homosexual sodomy is a crime against the Almighty. It is illegal on Earth and will be punished in the afterlife.
Only criminals going to hell will lie to you and say 4 wives are illegal on Earth and punished in the afterlife.
no, but if only 10% of the population does it that's still a 33 million member family.
My issue is with the necessary changes to benefits and divorce law. Their would need to be a clearly laid out divorce process to avoid problems.
Currently, if a couple divorces, they split the assets and debts. Modifications are made for kids, income disparity and extenuating circumstances.
Introduce a third person and what happens to assets? Do they split it 3 ways, do they split it in half? Who gets custody of kids?
What about insurance? If the husband has insurance, does it cover both wives? If a wife has insurance, does it cover both her husband and her sister-wife?
I'm not opposed to it on moral grounds so much as logistical grounds.
and did u see what happened to him. try again.
Also, 1 man can impregnate many women whereas 1 woman cant simultaneously carry the children of many men. thats a practical reason to oppose polyandry and support polygyny. but as i said, were not talking bout polyandry you stupid f***. stick to the topic.
Nemiroff basically just said that something shouldnt be allowed because its illegal. that just about shows his lack of brainpower. retard at best, retard at worst.
Nemiroff has down syndrome lmao. neveralone, what do you mean churches couldnt do it? King Solomon (you know who he is right?) had HUNDREDS, not tens, HUNDREDS of wives. so your argument is invalid.
If polygyny should be decriminalized, then why not polyandry? So, i am changing my position.
Decriminalizing polygamy doesn't mean there will be end of monogamy.
If polygamy is practical life style for them or not is their issue. some people in polygamy don't prefer to have children, just to make it practical for them.
I don't like polygamy because if both can marry it will get out of hand and you can end up with a 330 million member family. not really a moral complaint, just a practical one.
The topic however was specifically polygyny... which is only men can multi marry, and that violates the constitution.
a church couldn't do this.... agaisnt a huge law of ours.
yes, they cam too. I believe polygamy with consent should be legalized.
The problem isn't about consent, it's the double standard. why can't a woman take multiple husbands as long as they consent?
I don't think there is any problem, if female partners don't have any problem with this.
No problem, if there's consent.
polygyny is having more than 1 wife.
it is discriminatory against women.
polyandry is having more than 1 husband.
it is discriminatory against men.
either one of those fails to provide equal treatment under the law so the argument is the same for both.
also you didnt have to comment anyway, god knows what made you think your opinion ever mattered lol.
i just said that were not discussing polyandry, were discussing polygyny lmao, you dumb, retarded, illegitimate child! i mean i know you like to beg for attention but theres a level of autism id even expect you not to be able to stoop to.
No, it's discriminatory against women.
Were not discussing polyandry here (even though theres a million issues with it) so dont bring that up. were specifically discussing polygyny- should it be decriminalised? if so, why and if not, why not?