Do you believe that polygamy should be legal?

Posted by: minnymilerza

Please explain your choice in the comments section

Vote
27 Total Votes
1

Yes

16 votes
6 comments
2

No

10 votes
2 comments
3

It depends

1 vote
1 comment
4

Unsure

0 votes
0 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
UtherPenguin says2015-04-11T22:21:20.7580931-05:00
@reece Did you just strawman monotheist theology? Great, now I'm so butthurt that my butt got a crack and split in two.
minnymilerza says2015-04-11T22:34:30.5067554-05:00
Knight, what is the evidence behind your claim?
Reeseroni says2015-04-11T22:46:43.4502857-05:00
Marriage already is supposed to be between two people: a man and a woman. By making it legal for two men or two women to marry each other, the government has already changed the meaning of marriage. By allowing more than 2 people to marry each other, this will terminate the meaning of marriage.
komododragon8 says2015-04-11T22:58:20.8603979-05:00
Reeseroni: we have constantly been changing the meaning of marriage, a little while back polygamy was very common in marriages.
minnymilerza says2015-04-11T23:00:31.1804918-05:00
Reeseroni, so you'd rather the government control who we can and cannot marry?
AlexAnCom says2015-04-11T23:06:27.2124449-05:00
Don't like polygamy? Quite fine! But what gives you the right to stop others from practicing it?
Reeseroni says2015-04-11T23:26:21.7594724-05:00
I did not say that I do not like polygamy, I just do not believe that it should be legal. Komodo, I know we have- which is very unfortunate. Minny, I did not say the government should control who we marry, but they are going to act like a bad parent: Not caring what their children (american citizens) are doing, as long as it makes them happy, and does not bother the parent (government).
AlexAnCom says2015-04-11T23:27:35.0922896-05:00
Reeseronia, and why is polygamy so bad for some people for whom it works? I know plenty of people who are more polygamous than monogamous? What's the problem?
Reeseroni says2015-04-11T23:27:39.4458013-05:00
America has loosened many of its laws due to a kind of peer pressure, and such by Americans, always thinking that rules should be made to revolve around them, rather than keep a well-formed society.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-11T23:28:23.0315402-05:00
Polygamy is a gigantic step backward for women's rights.
minnymilerza says2015-04-11T23:29:00.7952878-05:00
Reeseroni, the majority of American citizens are not children. We should be allowed to marry whomever we want
AlexAnCom says2015-04-11T23:29:51.9383995-05:00
Explain to me this. Let's assume that a polygamous trio is entirely consensual and no one is being coerced. Let us further assume that the trio is made up of two men and one woman. What is so wrong with this group?
Reeseroni says2015-04-11T23:40:50.5208913-05:00
Alex, there is three of them. Not only is this gross, it is wrong. Not wrong because of my morals or values, and not gross for the same reason. It seems highly illogical for three people to be married, and share a bed. This just does not make sense.
reece says2015-04-11T23:42:46.4740652-05:00
@Texas14 And Christianity in that context?
minnymilerza says2015-04-11T23:45:10.4963591-05:00
Reeseroni, that's your opinion. You aren't their parent, and they are fully consenting individuals. If America truly is "land of the free," why do you wish to control the lives of others?
Reeseroni says2015-04-11T23:50:03.1573373-05:00
I do not wish to control the lives of others, we just need to establish where to draw the line. (No opinions in this statement, just FACT)
minnymilerza says2015-04-11T23:51:52.3168678-05:00
Reeseroni, that's still control. You believe that your opinion (opposing polygamy) is a fact. A fact, similar to 5+5=10. Irrefutable.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T01:14:36.7380455-05:00
To those 'shouldn't interfere with people's personal lives' people, legalising polygamy means giving state recognition to polygamous marriages. In other words, the government has to recognise an unethical, backward relationship that should have no place in the 21st century.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T01:49:18.6617288-05:00
Correction: Government recognition
Knightrius says2015-04-12T05:04:26.3183938-05:00
Minnymilerza, seems as if you haven't been in a serious relationship yet. Get back to me when you have a boyfriend/girlfriend.
AlexAnCom says2015-04-12T06:40:39.7505157-05:00
I'm against government involvement in marriage, there is a difference between allowing and supporting something.
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T09:38:27.0894518-05:00
Knight—what gave you that idea? I've been in several serious relationships
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T09:39:23.6383643-05:00
Cunmin—yes, and NOT allowing it gives the government a monopoly over marriage. They define who you can and cannot marry. Is that what you want?
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T09:54:09.6328098-05:00
I have no problem with governments having monopolies over anything as long as it's morally correct.
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T09:56:13.8905360-05:00
Cunmin—morality is relative. What you believe to be immoral, somebody else might support wholeheartedly
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T09:58:08.9695229-05:00
This is why - and I've said this multiple times on this site - we need a system in which only the morally superior, with a high level of self-cultivation, can rule.
reece says2015-04-12T10:00:08.0576327-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin Haha So the majority then? The religious. We're screwed.
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T10:00:57.7582769-05:00
Cunmin—how is moral superiority determined?
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T10:01:15.0583442-05:00
Morality should not be based on religion. Morality is based on self-cultivation. Self-cultivation is based on the principles of benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom, which were conferred to us by Nature.
reece says2015-04-12T10:03:27.9521885-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin Everything is natural (naturalism) So it's the majority, which is religion.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T10:03:36.7036202-05:00
If someone is respected by everyone (s)he meets, is filial to his/her parents, is trustworthy to his/her friends, etc. then (s)he must be superior.
reece says2015-04-12T10:04:23.4987581-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin yup, religion...
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T10:04:58.8834656-05:00
Cunmin—all right, so you've given your definition of morality. But everybody's definition is different
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T10:07:00.7349920-05:00
I don't really understand your logic, reece, but I need to go to bed now... We can continue this later.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-12T10:11:10.0387861-05:00
Also, for the record, I don't believe in 'naturalism' as you say. Man and nature should be one, as I've said on my profile, but I believe in cooperation between man and nature. The greatest thing Man can do is to assist in the transforming and nourishing powers of the heavens and earth. But I digress. What I meant was that morality is following the Path of duty, which nature has endowed upon us; this is human nature. 'What Heaven has conferred is called The Nature; an accordance with this nature is called The Path of duty; the regulation of this path is called Instruction.' (Doctrine of the Mean 1)
minnymilerza says2015-04-12T10:12:38.8140630-05:00
Cunmin—all right, so you've given your definition of morality. But everybody's definition is different.
reece says2015-04-12T10:16:58.0290098-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin The morally superior is usually the majority of people that accept each other which you. Now, the majority is religion, and if everyone is religious there would be no progress thus impending doom.
reece says2015-04-12T10:17:59.8350212-05:00
"which you" isn't meant to be in what i just said.
reece says2015-04-12T10:19:40.3026815-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin three words. Man is nature.
reece says2015-04-12T10:22:51.8213962-05:00
Can i give my definition of morality now?
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-13T02:01:45.7001388-05:00
@reece: Morality isn't determined statistically by opinion polls, but by how virtuous someone is, reece. We need a meritocratic system that ensures the ones in power are the truly virtuous. Besides, virtue isn't reflected in someone's beliefs; it's reflected in someone's actions. I come from one of the most atheist places in the world, so my experiences are inevitably different from yours, but I don't believe a man who preaches Christian dogma every day and yet ignores his parents, breaks every promise he makes and abuses his wife would be considered moral by the majority, or by anyone at all.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-13T02:06:17.1487784-05:00
@minny: Morality is innate. Let me show you this passage from Mencius 3.6. It's long, but it's IMO one of the most important passages ever written: 'When I say that all men have a mind which cannot bear to see the sufferings of others, my meaning may be illustrated thus: even now-a-days, if men suddenly see a child about to fall into a well, they will without exception experience a feeling of alarm and distress. They will feel so, not as a ground on which they may gain the favour of the child's parents, nor as a ground on which they may seek the praise of their neighbours and friends, nor from a dislike to the reputation of having been unmoved by such a thing. From this case we may perceive that the feeling of commiseration is essential to man, that the feeling of shame and dislike is essential to man, that the feeling of modesty and complaisance is essential to man, and that the feeling of approving and disapproving is essential to man. The feeling of commiseration is the principle of benevolence. The feeling of shame and dislike is the principle of righteousness. The feeling of modesty and complaisance is the principle of propriety. The feeling of approving and disapproving is the principle of knowledge. Men have these four principles just as they have their four limbs.' You see, all men have the four principles of morality; it is common to every single person of the homo sapien species. There's no way we can't tell whether someone is virtuous or not, given enough time and experience with that person.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-13T02:06:40.7665728-05:00
@reece: Sure, how would you define morality?
reece says2015-04-13T02:33:15.5773913-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin Humanity will always live by a hierarchy and a meritocratic system is one of them. With hierarchies come socialisation of morality. I admit there are different forms of morality (personal and social) but the most important is the social morality, which form majorities that agree with each other. Morality/virtue is reflected in both belief and action. I come from a fairly secular country too. For your last few sentences You're right, it's just ignored in a lot of cases.
reece says2015-04-13T02:46:43.3431184-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin I would define morality as progress in every form of the universes complexification... (Matter tends to complexify upon itself) in other words; just be us and evolve.
reece says2015-04-13T02:48:15.6885988-05:00
Morality is the universal laws that govern us.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-13T03:30:06.5534160-05:00
@reece: You know, if we have a truly virtuous leader, naturally he'd lead the population on the path of virtue, and we'd have a largely virtuous populace, and then social moral would always be good, and there'd be no problem following it. BTW 90% of the Hong Kong population was atheist according to a news report some time ago (probably a stretch; they likely counted agnostics, apatheists, deists, etc. in) and I don't think the US can beat that :P. I also don't disagree with your definition of morality and think it's consistent with mine.
reece says2015-04-13T03:47:49.2761660-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin What you said about a truly virtuous leader; There can't be progress without chaos. Remember matter complexifies upon itself. Thus creating friction. Yeah, china is one of the most secular countries.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-04-13T04:37:48.4666953-05:00
@reece: I just checked and realised you weren't American (I've always thought you was, maybe because of your opinions or the way you speak :P), sorry! I'm not sure what you meant by complexifying though; could you elaborate?
reece says2015-04-13T04:53:13.5208289-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin I'm dyslexic, that's probably why. You know the universe gets complex, right? Via chemistry.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.