The Instigator
xxx200
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
19146md
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

why not legalise polygamy

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/12/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,545 times Debate No: 18308
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (6)

 

xxx200

Pro

polygamy ( having sexual relation with more than one woman) is good for a man. itjust hels him not to get bored. man by nature a sexual animal. women are hi food. so why not let him have more food ?
19146md

Con

Polygamy is immoral, barbaric and disrespectful. A man is only supposed to have one wife he can cherish forever. Having sex with many women is disrespectful.
Debate Round No. 1
xxx200

Pro

but why polygamy is immoral, barbaric? why on earth a man who has the capacity can't have 2 wives ? i can't find an explanation. a man can love more than one woman. he has the capacity to do so. he can have as many lovers as possible beside his legal wife in euope. then why can't have as many wives as he can support ? pls explain.
19146md

Con

19146md forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
xxx200

Pro

polygamy was widespread in europe in ancient times. the early hibrew kings are polygamous. even king solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. lets see an evidence:

"Polygamy, in ancient times, was widespread, but has become less common over time. The most common form of polygamy is polygyny. Polygynous marriages are found in the Old Testament, especially among the early Hebrew kings. The first recorded polygamist was Lamech (Genesis 4:19), in the seventh generation from Adam. The book of Deuteronomy gives an inheritance rule for polygynous families.[2] The culmination was Solomon with 700 wives and 300 concubines; however, the fact that they were from the pagan nations led him down the path of corruption.[3] There was also a practice of giving a maid servant to a husband to sire children in the period of the patriarchs; Scripture refers to such a maid servant variously as a wife[4] and as a concubine[5]. God, speaking through the prophet Nathan, addressed David's polygamy without expressing disapproval:

And Nathan said to David, Thou [art] the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if [that had been] too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. 2Samuel 12:7-8 (KJV)."

so we can see that old testament support polygamy. it is also supported by some jewish sects.

"Sephardi Jews continued to practice it in Islamic lands for some time after that. Yemeni and Ethiopian Jews practice it to this day."

so, we can see from these evidences that polygamy is practised by a large number of people in the world. they do not get hurt by its practice. if they do, then polygamy will probably be eliminated. then why my opponent say it is immoral ?

source:http://www.conservapedia.com...
19146md

Con

My opponent has not provided a URL/ corrct citing. How do we know this is refutable? Anyways-

Let's do a little scenario: Pretend you are a girl (I don't know if you are one, though I'm assuming you aren't) You have just found the love of your life. You marry and live a happy life. Then one day, your husband comes home and announces he is getting married again. Your heart is shattered. You get depressed.

That is why we should not legalize polygamy. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
xxx200

Pro

My opponent has not provided a URL/ corrct citing. How do we know this is refutable? Anyways-

i have provided my source at :http://www.conservapedia.com......
this link is still working.i chacked it now.

Let's do a little scenario: Pretend you are a girl (I don't know if you are one, though I'm assuming you aren't) You have just found the love of your life. You marry and live a happy life. Then one day, your husband comes home and announces he is getting married again. Your heart is shattered. You get depressed.

first of all, lets see wheather a girl really dislike polygamy or not ? if all women really dislike it, then the practise of polygamy was no more. but in ancient times,the entire world was polygamous including europe. in modern time, polygamy prevails some part of the world and the entire muslim world.muslim living in europe can't practice it because of legal prohibition. otherwise they would do it. muslims in africa and arabia practice it widely. if polygamy is so bad for women, then father of the bride will never give her daughter to a polygamous man. but it is not bad for the following reasons:

1] if a first wife is infertile, then her husbend will have a kid from second wife.
this is the chief reason.

2] if a man has sexual desire and his first wife cannot fullfill it, then second wife can.

3] in modern day busy life context, a second wife will give company to the first wife in absense of husbend.

4] there is no visible physical and mental harm in polygamy.

then why the heart of a western woman would break ? because she was taught that loving another woman = not loving herself, which is an invalid equation, of course.


19146md

Con

19146md forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
xxx200

Pro

it seems my opponent has lost his argument.
19146md

Con

Back in the ancient days, polygamy was fine because it was a patriachal society. Now, we have women who are working as CEO's and Lawyers and famous authors. In fact, we even have stay at home dads.

1- if a first wife is infertile, then her husbend will have a kid from second wife.
this is the chief reason.

---If a wife is infertile, there are adoption agencies.

2-if a man has sexual desire and his first wife cannot fullfill it, then second wife can

--If a man is having sexual relations with another woman, than that man is not loyal. Relationships are based on loyalty.

3- in modern day busy life context, a second wife will give company to the first wife in absense of husbend

--thats what modern day techology is for. We have cellphones, Skype, etc.

4-there is no visible physical and mental harm in polygamy
--there is emotional harm. True, there is no physical, but mentally ties in with emotionally.

As I have shown today, polygamy SHOULD NOT be legalized. It is unjust and barbaric. Thank you and vote Aff
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by xxx200 6 years ago
xxx200
none of these commeator has ever understood my point. the points which i show, they cannot see it becase......i don't know why ? the people cannot see the obvious reality or the nature of man and woman. what a pity!
Posted by 19146md 6 years ago
19146md
lol he went all out on the whole sexist arguments...I like that he still believes we live in a patriarchal society.
Posted by seraine 6 years ago
seraine
@jm_notguilty

Supporting the natural order of things is not sexist.

:P
Posted by thett3 6 years ago
thett3
wait he used conservapedia as a source? oh man, now I'm tempted to deduct the source points just for that...I mean come on...I'm conservative and even I know that's absolute garbage
Posted by Lordknukle 6 years ago
Lordknukle
this might have been an interesting debate if the instigator wasn't such a troll.

Con didn't do too much either.
Posted by jm_notguilty 6 years ago
jm_notguilty
LOL, that's the most sexist argument supporting Polygamy I've ever heard.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
xxx20019146mdTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by jm_notguilty 6 years ago
jm_notguilty
xxx20019146mdTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO regrettably gets conduct since he didn't forfeit, CON gets grammar point since I found PRO's structure not too nice, I found neither side's arguments convincing, no reliable source even, to make a legitimate argument on legalizing polygamy. So... TIE.
Vote Placed by kohai 6 years ago
kohai
xxx20019146mdTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Winner=Noone cos no one debated!
Vote Placed by seraine 6 years ago
seraine
xxx20019146mdTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: lolwut
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 6 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
xxx20019146mdTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro loses conduct for ad-hom attacks, Con loses it for forfeits. Both had some horrible spelling errors, Pro has no idea what font he is supposed to use to make the debate readable. Neither side presented coherent argument. The only source presented was conservapedia. The Troll 1 vs Troll 2. Winner = no one. On a side note, Thett3 is undecided whether he wants to legalize polygamy? lol
Vote Placed by thett3 6 years ago
thett3
xxx20019146mdTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Oh my God, the mediocrity, it's too much to handle!