The Instigator
thegoddamnreaper
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
SegBeg
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Polygamy should be legal

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
thegoddamnreaper
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/8/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 298 times Debate No: 93476
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

thegoddamnreaper

Pro

Any one interested can join.
SegBeg

Con

I'm SegBeg and I will be arguing that polygamy should stay illegal
Debate Round No. 1
thegoddamnreaper

Pro

Definition: " The state or practice of being married to more than one person at the same time".
I: Human Rights
In a democracy, a person has basic political rights. These political rights gives freedom for expression, to protest, to organize, etc. The UN has an entire article on the right to marry between a man and a woman.
"ARTICLE 16
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality
or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled
to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the
intending spouses. "

However, this only covers heterosexual marriages. So, most countries have included homosexual marriages into theiir own "Right to Marry". The next, logical step is to legalise polygamy.

If a person wishes so, he can have the consent from his previous spouse and marry another one. The State has no bearing upon him. As the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16, states:
"Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the
intending spouses. "
Why would this be wrong? There is consent, after all.
II: Religious reasons
1. Christianity - There are plenty of verses that implies polygamy is "wrong". The founder of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther, once wrote that "I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter."
2. Other religions: Polygamy is prevalent in most of the other religions, such as Hinduism or Judaism.
III: Economic Reasons:
A study shows that in polygyny, the woman are more likely to be benefited than polyandry when the sex ration is more.

With all the above stated reasons, I want polygamy to be legalised.

Sources:
1. http://www.merriam-webster.com...
2. http://www.ohchr.org...

3. http://www.gasl.org...
4. Luter, Martin. De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329–330.

5. https://www.unc.edu...
SegBeg

Con

Thank you for your argument. I will give you very good reasons why legalized polygamy is a bad idea:

First of all, there are actually two defintions of polygamy. Polygamy simply means "many spouses". We have polyandry which is when a woman has more than one husband and polygyny which is when a man has more than one wife. Polyandry is rare and only practiced in more remote parts of the world. But I assume you want to only talk about polygyny so I will go with that.

1.) Higher risk of STD's

It has been proven that if you have intercourse with more than one person, you will be at a higher risk of catching Sexualy Transmitted Diseases. So if a man has more than one wife and he has intercourse with all of them, he could give some of them STD's such as chlamydia or HIV.

2.) Polygynos men are not very good fathers

Usually polygynous families are VERY large. Some even have up to 40 children. How can a man be a father to 40 children? There is an underlying theory that due to the fact that married men would remain perennially in the marriage market, high-status men could choose to invest their resources in acquiring more wives rather than investing in their children. Similarly, the pool of unmarried men would be forced to invest their resources in attempting to improve their status so as to improve their chances of finding a bride.

3.) Age gap and Gender Equality

Allegedly, when the competition for brides go up, men try to secure brides at younger ages. Male kin learn the value of their female relatives, start treating them like an economic resource, and exert control of women’s reproductive lives.

Competition drives men to use whatever connections, advantages, and alliances they have in order to obtain wives, including striking financial and reciprocal bargains with the fathers of daughters (this is the very common practice ofbrideprice). Once girls and young women become wives, older husbands (and brothers) will strive to â��protectâ�" their young wives from other males (to guarantee paternity of any offspring), and in the process dampen womenâ��s freedoms and exacerbate inequality.

4.)Jealousy

Women in a polygynous relationship are more likely to feel envy for their sister wives. There are many reasons for it some might be:

The man spends more time with one wife than the other(s)

One wife is not able to bear children but the other(s) are/is

They want the man all to themselves

Of course some women are more than happy in their polygynous relationship. This is not for all women.

5.) Religious reasons

I see that you mentioned that in Christianity, polygamy was practiced. By Abraham, King Solomon, etc. This is correct, however, none of these marriages were seen in a positive way. With Abraham, his wife, Sarah became bitter towards his surrogate, Hagar and she threw her out. With King Solomon, he had 1000 wives- 700 wives and 300 concubines, however, many of the women he married were pagans and they led his heart away from the Lord. Also, no New Testament partiarch was ever a polygamist. Though I cannot speak for the other religions, I cannot let you use Christianity as an excuse.

6.) It's pointless

There is really no need for polygamy. I get why it was used in the olden days. Women back then were unable to provide for themselves and were completely dependent on men so it would make sense for there to be polygamy but nowadays I see no point in it. Women are able to provide for and protect themselves so it seems that polygamy nowadays would just seem like greediness or turn into a competition between men on which one will have the most wives

In conclusion, polygamy should stay illegal because it is not good for men, women, children or the rest of society!

Debate Round No. 2
thegoddamnreaper

Pro

I find the lack of sources disturbing. I will get to that later. Also, I would like my opponent to focus on polygamy in general, not just polygyny.

I Higher risk for STD's:
I don't get it. STD's require better profiling, true. But that is not an argument against polygamy. The spouse must have consent before marrying, and no rational person would agree to marrying a person carrying a STD. So, if there is proper profiling, this point falls flat.

II Polygynos men are not very good fathers
One, I need sources, citations, etc.
Second, why would high-status men choose to marry more wives? What do they gain?
Three, if there was an alternative reason for marrying apart from love, that would be for more children. If people wanted more children, then they would care for their health and safety.
Fourth, my opponent have no sources for large number of children. 40 children, as is given, are only exceptions of the general-norm--less or no children. Families having more children have trouble trying manage their living.

III Age gap and Gender Equality
"Allegedly, when the competition for brides go up, men try to secure brides at younger ages."
Why would they do that? Why does Con keep thinking men want more wives? Any why younger ages? This is not the 17th century, where women are treated as an "economic resource".
"Competition drives men to use whatever connections, advantages, and alliances they have in order to obtain wives.."
What competition? Why would men want to compete (I'm guessing with men in general) for wives? Also, women have freedom of expression. It is a democracy, after all. Marriage would not be possible without consent.

IV Jealousy
In my previous argument, I say, "If a person wishes so, he can have the consent from his previous spouse and marry another one. "
That pretty much sums it up. If more attention is paid to one partner, the other can divorce.

V Religious reasons
No verse in the Old and New Testament states that polygamy shoud not be practised, without some ambiguity and vagueness. Therefore, there is no religious obstacle.

VI It's pointless

Con seems to think just because (s)he thinks it's pointless, this debate is not worth having. Even if, "women are able to provide for and protect themselves", they could still fall in love with the same man. Polygamy gives people a chance to choose more than one partner.
"...it seems that polygamy nowadays would just seem like greediness or turn into a competition between men on which one will have the most wives"
Con seems to be stuck to this point. Where is the competition? Why would men compete for more wives? Even if, there is a competition, where would one get more spouses? For spouses, you need consent.

With this, I have refuted Con's arguments.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org...
SegBeg

Con

Good rebuttal.But mine will be even better!!! :)



The spouse must have consent before marrying, and no rational person would agree to marrying a person carrying a STD.


Then they really don't love each other then do they? You'd dump a person just because they hav STD's. You can still get married- just use a condom!

II Polygynos men are not very good fathers
One, I need sources, citations, etc.

Sure:

http://huntergatherer.com...


Second, why would high-status men choose to marry more wives? What do they gain?

There's this thing called gredd. I don't tknow if you've heard of it. Some men are like that. They are never satisfied with what they want so they keep demanding more and more. Of course not all men are like this. I'm just saying that some men will most definitely act like this if polygamy were made legal.

Three, if there was an alternative reason for marrying apart from love, that would be for more children. If people wanted more children, then they would care for their health and safety.

Really. Ever heard of the Duggars? How their oldest son Josh Duggar molested some of his sisters and his parents didn't even bother to call the police. Heck the girls didn't even know they were actually being abused caus of all the brainwashing. (Again, not all people are like this).

Fourth, my opponent have no sources for large number of children.

It was just an idea. But since you want source, I'll give you some:

https://en.wikipedia.org...

https://en.wikipedia.org...


Have quite a lot children don't they?


"Allegedly, when the competition for brides go up, men try to secure brides at younger ages."
Why would they do that?

Why wouldn't they?

Why does Con keep thinking men want more wives?

I never thought that. But there are indeed MANY men who want more wives but they cant because it's against the law. These men will immediately try to find as many wives a possible to be their bride(s) no matter how old or young they are.

"Competition drives men to use whatever connections, advantages, and alliances they have in order to obtain wives.."
What competition? Why would men want to compete (I'm guessing with men in general) for wives?

As you might not know, men are very competitive creatures. While some men might not intend to comete at who can have the most wives, some eventually will.


Also, women have freedom of expression. It is a democracy, after all. Marriage would not be possible without consent.

And legalizing polygamy might take that away. While I know some women might go into a polygamous relationship with full consent, not all end up enjoying it. Maybe their husband turns out to be a complete tyrannical dictator and treates his wives and children like property. Maybe she neds up being jealous of her sister wives. Many things pop up.


In my previous argument, I say, "
If a person wishes so, he can have the consent from his previous spouse and marry another one. "
That pretty much sums it up. If more attention is paid to one partner, the other can divorce.

You just proved my argument here. Polygamny does not always work out just like monogamy does not always work out. In polygamy there is SO much more room for jealousy if the man is spending more time with one wife than all the others so then divorce comes and that would probably be a greater impact on the children (if there are any) than in a momogamous relationship since polygamous realtionships normally tend to have much more children.



No verse in the Old and New Testament states that polygamy shoud not be practised, without some ambiguity and vagueness. Therefore, there is no religious obstacle.


True BUT there are some verses in the New Testament that suggest that God intended for marraige to be momogamous:

Ephesians 5:31 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, cleave to his WIFE ( not wives) and they will become one flesh"

1 Timothy 3:2 "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of ONE wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;" This verse states that polymanous men are not eligible for Chruch leadership

So I don't think it would be practical for a Christian man to be polygamous. But I cannot speak for the other religions as I am rather ignorant of them compared to my own.


Con seems to think just because (s)he thinks it's pointless, this debate is not worth having.

Quite contrary acutally. Why would I accept this debate if I didn't think it was worth having? That would just be a waste of my time and yours. I actually think legalized polygamy is a reasonable thing to discuss as more and more people- mainly men are advocating for it.


Even if, "women are able to provide for and protect themselves", they could still fall in love with the same man.

Even in this monogamous society people hate it when somebody else in in love with the same person. How would that be any different in a polygamous society?


Polygamy gives people a chance to choose more than one partner.

Why do they need more than one partner may I ask? It just seems rather pointless. I know this sounds quite subjective and all but that's just what it looks like. In my personal opinion, I don't regard polygamy as real marriages (but who says my opinion counts?)


Con seems to be stuck to this point. Where is the competition? Why would men compete for more wives? Even if, there is a competition, where would one get more spouses? For spouses, you need consent.

I don't think I'm stuck at all. There's no competition at the moment because polygamy is illegal. But if it were to be legalized there very well could be just as there very well could not be. Like I said above. Men do tend to be more competitive than women so what makes you think that they wouldn't compete for more wives?

With this, I have refuted Con's arguments.

With this, I have refuted Pro's arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
thegoddamnreaper

Pro

I would like to begin, with a small incredulous outburst: did Con just send me TV reality shows as "sources" for polygamy resulting in more children?! Incredility over, the argument starts.

"Then they really don't love each other then do they? You'd dump a person just because they hav STD's. You can still get married- just use a condom!"

Con just proved his/hers argument wrong. If they use condoms, from where will the spouses get STD's? If it is from kisses, then my previous argument still stands. No one voluntarily would put himself into harm.

"There's this thing called gredd. I don't tknow if you've heard of it. Some men are like that. They are never satisfied with what they want so they keep demanding more and more. "

Gredd? Fine, it's greed. Greed for what? Dominance/power? One, you cannot dominant wherever consent is involved. Consent implies that a person considers another to be worthy enough to be his partner. Two, there's always divorce. If it's not dominance, then it must be money, right? No one gains money from a marriage (dowry is pretty much extinct). Greed for sex? One, consent. If the two have more of a sexual desire, there is nothing wrong with that. If one partner doesn't like it and wants more, there will not be any marriage. Two, divorce.

"...their oldest son Josh Duggar molested some of his sisters.."

Molestation is not consent. If your point is sexual desire, see above.

""Allegedly, when the competition for brides go up, men try to secure brides at younger ages."
Why would they do that?

Why wouldn't they? "

First, 'Why wouldn't they?' is not an argument.
Second, if you mean men want younger wives as they are more attractive, it's pretty much the same argument. If the two have only a sexual desire, there is nothing wrong with that. If one partner doesn't like it and wants more but the other doesn't, there will not be any marriage.
Third, why would competition for brides grow? If it's "gredd", see above.

"But there are indeed MANY men who want more wives but they cant because it's against the law. These men will immediately try to find as many wives a possible to be their bride(s) no matter how old or young they are."

Nothing in that sentence is wrong. Many men might want more wives. I, however, object to the "try to find as many wives as possible." Men are not "shopping" for wives. They do not go out and search for prospective wives. (If so, that's called stalking and it's punishable under the law.) But, in the end, they NEED consent from the women. That is the crux of this entire debate.

" While I know some women might go into a polygamous relationship with full consent, not all end up enjoying it. Maybe their husband turns out to be a complete tyrannical dictator and treates his wives and children like property. Maybe she neds up being jealous of her sister wives. "

DIVORCE. DIVORCE. DIVORCE.

"You just proved my argument here. "

No, I did not. Yes, the relationships are complicated. Stable marriages might be an impossiblity. But, that would not be possible if the previous spouse had not accepted the husband's choice of spouse. Of course, a possessive partner would be a tough obstacle. Societal norms would change, for example, having a date along with one's partner, etc.
Children are a different facet. Why would there be a greater impact on children in a polygamous relationship? It would probably be the same as in a monogamous relationship.

"So I don't think it would be practical for a Christian man to be polygamous. "

Here, I drop my religious arguments, as I am not a Christian. I do not know how to argue for them.


"Even in this monogamous society people hate it when somebody else in in love with the same person. How would that be any different in a polygamous society?"

Uh.. the spouse's consent is needed?

"Why do they need more than one partner may I ask? It just seems rather pointless. I know this sounds quite subjective and all but that's just what it looks like. In my personal opinion, I don't regard polygamy as real marriages (but who says my opinion counts?) "

There might be no need for polygamy, but it doesn't mean that polygamy should be criminalised. If there arises a situation, polygamy could be one way of solving it.

"Men do tend to be more competitive than women so what makes you think that they wouldn't compete for more wives? "

The use of sexist arguments is probably frowned upon in DDO. Competition for wives is refuted above.

With that, my arguments for polygamy is over.

SegBeg

Con

did Con just send me TV reality shows as "sources" for polygamy resulting in more children?!

Yeah I did. They are real people after all and their family is real so what makes it invalid?

Con just proved his/hers argument wrong.

No I didn't (ps. I'm a girl so just call me she/her).


If they use condoms, from where will the spouses get STD's?

Ridiculous! If one of the spouses had STD's then that would force them to use a condom and stop them from having children especially if that is what they really wanted. How sad is that?

One, you cannot dominant wherever consent is involved.

Do you mean "dominate?" And yes you can whether there is consent to it or not. The definition of dominance is to have power on infulence over someone against their will or not.

Consent implies that a person considers another to be worthy enough to be his partner.

I get that, but that is not what I'm implying.


No one gains money from a marriage

False. But this really depends on the individual couple. When your're married, sometimes your partner has access to your money if you give them access to it or if youhave a joined back account or something (forgive me I'm not ver good with finances). SO what if you come from a wealthy family? Your spose could all of a sudden freeze you bank account(s) and leave you in debt if they are a horrible partner.


Greed for sex? One, consent. If the two have more of a sexual desire, there is nothing wrong with that.

No there isn't. I was not implying greed for sex but since men normally have higher sex drives than women, it would kind of make sense for SOME men to have a need for sex so he must have as many female partners as possible. Again, I'm not implying ALL men are like this, but some very well may be.


If one partner doesn't like it and wants more, there will not be any marriage. Two, divorce.

They shouldn't have married in the FIRST place!


"
...their oldest son Josh Duggar molested some of his sisters.."

Molestation is not consent. If your point is sexual desire, see above.

That's not the point. I was saying that not all parents are good parent of their children and although I understand why Jim Bob and Michelle would be hesitant to call the police on their own son, the completely disregarded their own daughters!


""Allegedly, when the competition for brides go up, men try to secure brides at younger ages."
Why would they do that?

Why wouldn't they? "

First, 'Why wouldn't they?' is not an argument.

Why can't it be an argument? What makes you think that men will not want to get brides at a younger age if there are few available for them already?


Second, if you mean men want younger wives as they are more attractive, it's pretty much the same argument. If the two have only a sexual desire, there is nothing wrong with that.

So you think that a 15 year old girl sleeping with a 40 year old man is okay? (just an example).


If one partner doesn't like it and wants more but the other doesn't, there will not be any marriage.

Shouldn't have gotten married in the first place!


Third, why would competition for brides grow?

Isn't it obvious? If all men went to be polygamists, there would be fewer women for other men to marry so they would be at competition with one another to take a wife. It really isn't that hard to understand.


If it's "gredd", see above.

Don't toy with me! :)

I, however, object to the "try to find as many wives as possible." Men are not "shopping" for wives. They do not go out and search for prospective wives.

How do you know that? There are many men in the 21st century who act like 19th century men who only view women as sexual objects and their property to be owned. These men might very well go around "stalking" for wives.


But, in the end, they NEED consent from the women. That is the crux of this entire debate.

Everything in this world is now about "consent" isn't it? Well did you know that what people want is not always what's best for them? (it's just a statement that is not necessarily relevant to what we are talking about but I am sick and tired of hearing the "consenting adults" argument)



DIVORCE. DIVORCE. DIVORCE.

I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW! But divorce can be a hard financial and emotional hit on a married couple and their children. Some women are scared of divorce because of these reasons so divorce is not always the best route to happiness. You may be free from abuse and all but then for some people it will be a struggle to provide for yourself and your children if you have any.


Yes, the relationships are complicated. Stable marriages might be an impossiblity. But, that would not be possible if the previous spouse had not accepted the husband's choice of spouse. Of course, a possessive partner would be a tough obstacle. Societal norms would change, for example, having a date along with one's partner, etc.
Children are a different facet. Why would there be a greater impact on children in a polygamous relationship? It would probably be the same as in a monogamous relationship.

Of course monogamous marriages are not nearly as perfect just like polygamous marriages aren't but let's just say for arguments sake that the man wanted to take another wife and one of his other ones was not to happy about it. Don't you think he should seek approval from his other wives? Otherwise when he married this other woman, there could be a bitter jealously between her and the other wives. Again, this is just for arguments sake. You don't get that type of thing in monogamous relationships. Yes there can still be jealousy but you won't have to necessarily spend the rest of your life with that person unlike in a polygamous relationship.


"Even in this monogamous society people hate it when somebody else in in love with the same person. How would that be any different in a polygamous society?"

Uh.. the spouse's consent is needed?

Uh, and what if the spouse doesn't give consent?


There might be no need for polygamy, but it doesn't mean that polygamy should be criminalised. If there arises a situation, polygamy could be one way of solving it.

And if there were ever to come a day, the government would then make polygamy legal. Simple, but right now, there is no situation that requires polygamy.


The use of sexist arguments is probably frowned upon in DDO.

I'm not being sexist. There's nothing wrong with men being more competitive than women.


With that, my arguments against polygamy is over.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by TheBenC 5 months ago
TheBenC
I agree that polygamy should be legal but it is still wrong! Usually it is 1 man with 2 or more wives. The moral problem (not religious nor legal problem) is how selfish this is. In the 1 man example, he has more wives than he needs while other men have 0 wives. If he is "blessed" by having such a big family, he should share that blessing by letting those extra wives marry other men!

There is another long term problem. Look at the parts of society that allowed polygamy. They literally had to kick boys out of their culture because they need to have more women than men. Get rid of the boys and marry the girls...

On it's surface there is nothing wrong with polygamy but when you dig deeper you find it is a terrible option.
Posted by lapinouuk 5 months ago
lapinouuk
I guess that in a perfect world, as long as the people involved legitimately love each other, it should be OK.
Posted by caty44444444 5 months ago
caty44444444
what's the structure and rules for this debate?
Posted by lord_megatron 5 months ago
lord_megatron
I agree with pro
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Bored_Debater 4 months ago
Bored_Debater
thegoddamnreaperSegBegTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Argument on basic right of marriage & consent from all involved goes unchallenged throughout the debate, point goes to pro. Using a TV show as a source to keep it short is unreliable, point goes to pro.