Should people be legally permitted to marry more than one person?

Posted by: pozessed

Should any person be able to acquire as many spouses as he/she feels appropriate?

  • Yes

  • No.

44% 56 votes
56% 71 votes
  • I see no reason why not.

  • The government has no (legitimate) interest in preventing polygamy.

    Posted by: vortux
  • why not? just boosts the odds of being able to find the one person youre meant to be with. if afterwords you only want them, divorce the others

    Posted by: negang
  • If people want to live together they will so you might as well let them get married. But make a marriage that wasn't signed off on by the other spouses a grounds for divorce.

  • Anything wrong?

  • As long as all parties are consenting and know what they're getting into, and legal arrangements are set up for how property and such are divided in the case of divorce, why not?

  • While I myself have wouldn't marry more than one person, there's really no reason to limit it to one. If all parties involved are okay with it, then I say it should be allowed.

  • I firmly believe that you can love more than one person. and that it should be legal for multiple people to marry one person. How ever it would have to be an agreement to all of the people they are all married to each other in one binding marriage. If all the people agree you can divorce just one person

  • As long as every participant is of age, and willing, and accepting of the shared relationship, then I see no reason why not.

  • There is nothing inherently wrong with polygamy. I can see no reason that restrictions should be imposed upon multiple consenting adults if they wish to be married.

    Posted by: Yevon
  • personal freedom

  • There's really no point in preventing it. Polygamists are going to be living the lifestyle anyway.

    Posted by: AJRoss
  • Why Not? No one cares about marriage anymore; cheat, get divorced, marry same sex. Might as well legalize bestiality and incest while your at.

  • Why not?

  • Can we not take our own personal religious beliefs on what goes on in our government? If a person wants to marry multiple people (let it be a homo/heterosexual relationships) so be it.

  • If you love more than one person, sure, why the hell not. Marriage is an ancient custom made up by tribe leaders to seal land deals anyways.

  • If it is 100% consensual. Polygamy isnt about consent, but being a polyamourous person consents. SO.

  • limit 4, and meet all requirements.

    Posted by: Najs
  • You should be married to one person and one person only if you feel the need to get married to more then one person you are not ready for marriage and you know nothing about love if you really love someone and want to be with them for the rest of your life you wouldn't think about getting married to more then one person

  • I don't want to share a man with other women. Hell no, get yourself one.

    Posted by: leojm
  • What Leojm said :)

  • This one is hard for me. Marriage is directly between one person and another person. Even the commitment you are agreeing to essentially entails that you are with that person and only that person for life. If you wanted to say is it okay to have a threesome if your Wife condones it, then that would be acceptable because both parties agree and it is not risking the foundation of marriage itself. Marriage is a commitment between two people. Not man and woman, it can very will be a man and another man, or a woman and another woman. The vows you take emphasize, that you are committed that person only though. So outside of marriage if both parties agree that it is okay to sex around, that is their choice. With the actual act of polygamy, I would say no though.

    Posted by: Mikal
  • Marriage= 1 man, 1 womon

  • Polygamy is horrible and will surely invoke God's wrath. Besides, what kind of person would want to share their spouse with multiple other people. It's sickening.

  • We need to stop destroying the purpose of marriage.

  • It would be chaos for more than one woman to share a man. Chaos.

  • Marriage is a social agreement to exclusively be in a relationship with some other person that you are deeply in love with, and who dearly loves you. Not just '1 man, 1 woman', two individuals who are in love. It's a pair bond. *Pair* bond. Having this exclusive pair bond contain more than two individuals kind of misses the point.

  • Of the many reasons, this time I'll go with this: jealousy-based murders which are guaranteed to ensue. One may say, "Oh, but they know they are one of two wives going into it, so it's safer than say, cheating", but no. The legal documentation of two wives only makes the desire to compete higher since the knowledge of one another is definitely present.

  • Marriage has been defined as the joining of two people. Just leave it at that. It'll get too complicated

  • You do realize there will be men without wives if that happens.

  • If they are granted LEGAL marriage rights they have the right to adopt. I don't want any adopted children in anything but a warm, stable, nuclear family.

    Posted by: JDuB
  • I can see why some individuals believe that it isn't that big of a deal to be married to more than one person but lets consider a few things: People marry more than once for various reasons. It can be because they are divorced or separated with their spouses. It could be because they are not satisfied with their partners sexually. It could also be because they could not get on with their life with their current partner and that being with another is the only resolution. In any case, when a legal separation or annulment is not granted, marrying another is still against the law. Is there any law allowing a man to marry another woman? The law differs from one country to another. In fact, religion plays a vital role in this issue. For Muslims, they are allowed to marry more than one woman for a long as they treat their wives equally. In the Mormon Church, polygamy was allowed by its founder, Joseph Smith. He even said that having multiple wives at the same time is divine. There could be countless reasons why men marry too many times in their lives and it’s just sad to know why women allows this thing to happen and still have the love in their hearts with their husbands (But, this is just my opinion). If you are in a polygamous relationship and you are a woman, psychological problems may be present and this would include, loss of appetite that will lead to weight loss, depression and mood swings. Different people have different beliefs, traditions and culture and while some may be shocked knowing a friend of them is a polygamous, some may just shrug it off and say, “so what?”

    Posted by: BB18
  • No, it is an ancient school of thought to marry more than one person.

  • I don't believe that having more than one spouse is right. Another thing I am Mormon we do not practice polygamy! Marriage should be two people it doesn't matter gender I don't judge

    Posted by: Katpie
  • No! It would completely destroy the point of marriage. Marriage is supposed to be a vow that you love this ONE person more than anything in the world!

  • No destroys marriage. Women's rights and equality are stake. Your giving one man a bunch of women reducing each women's importance. PATHETIC IF YOU ASK ME.

  • I don't think it's right, but the government doesn't seem to care about preventing it.

  • nah thats just slut shit

    Posted by: won
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
leojm says2013-09-09T13:04:07.8365249-05:00
If you Muslim yeah.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T14:30:07.7985416-05:00
You are jealous
pozessed says2013-09-09T14:32:43.8015416-05:00
I believe people should have the right to choose. I don't think it should be illegal to marry more than one person only because your government disapproves. If there were potential harms to society I could understand but I can't think of any. People who believe in monogamist relationships could still practice those relationships with laws that don't restrict polygamy.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T15:01:53.8821321-05:00
Even if Polygamy is banned, a person can have relationship with more than one person and all can live in the same house without any marriage. Then what is the point of ban?
pozessed says2013-09-09T15:22:09.3331232-05:00
Money. IMO.
Mikal says2013-09-09T15:25:15.6475061-05:00
^ that is called a threesome in sex or a threeway if you are referring to actually trying to make it work in 3 directions. With humans that is almost impossible because one of the three will always get jealous. There are ways people found around that such as letting their spouse sleep with other people without knowing whom it was or when it was. It is suppose to make the relationship go better. I disagree on all points though. While a person is free to see and date whom they will, and even under law are allowed to cheat. You are breaching a promise made to that spouse. So unless your spouse gives you direct permission that is okay, it brings up many ethical and moral questions.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T15:44:07.8129235-05:00
No one argues about immorality of cheating. If person agrees to that his or her spouse can have an extra relationship, the why spouse who has an extra relationship cant marry to the person who he or she has an extra relationship with?
MasturDbtor says2013-09-09T15:44:57.4430064-05:00
@ Mikal Even if it's typical for people to get jealous it would depend on individual attitudes. Some people, particularly if they have higher more important concerns occupying their attention may not bother to care or worry too much about whether their partner is too into the other person involved. Personally I'd think of it as if I'm enjoying it why should I care if they enjoy each other more so long as my financial security is not being adversely effected by it.
Mikal says2013-09-09T15:50:47.3678071-05:00
An extra relationship is directly upon them. It in in the situation, The issue with it ethically is that you are breaching the premise of marriage. It is a commitment between two people. Man and Woman, Man and Man, Woman and Woman that you will with "them and only them", forever. To death do us part, far to many people underscore the vow that is being made. If someone wants to engage in sexual exploration after marriage, that is their right. Threesomes, or even having another person whom they care about live with them. All that is permissible. If they want to tie there spouse to a bed and beat her with a rubber hose because they enjoy, it is whatever floats their boat. Defiling the promise that is being made openly is a disgrace to me though. That brings up moral and ethical questions about the foundation of marriage. There would be no point to be married at that point. It would even bring up issues with taxes, because you could be supporting 20 families and get a 100k tax cut because technically by law you have 300 kids.
Mikal says2013-09-09T15:52:22.8616797-05:00
Literally you would have to rework and refine so many issues, that is is not worth even considering it.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T15:56:00.5282293-05:00
Who makes the premise of marriage? Spouse can disregard the "It is a commitment between two people" part. Or can make their own premise. Then there will be no ethical or moral problems. And by the way, who can absolutely say if something is unethical or immoral? If no one then there is no such a thing (or understanding) as ethical or unethical, or, moral or immoral.
Mikal says2013-09-09T16:05:42.1854148-05:00
I did not say it was unethical or moral to that person. I could care less whom people screw or do not screw. If they want to have an orgy or have 30 mistresses that is their choice. I said it brings up ethical issues regarding marriage. The entire essence of marriage is commitment to one person. There would be no need to be married, if you went into it with the mindset of not upholding the premise behind it. The only time I have even heard that brought up is by Mormons and I don't even consider them religious as much as I consider them a cult. It is just a more stupid version of Christianity.
MasturDbtor says2013-09-09T16:09:22.7457641-05:00
@ Mikal Marriage is a legal contract. Why do you think only 2 people should get the specific legal benefits of it? If you're so hung up on the label "marriage" then would you have any objection if marriage was made just a cultural/spiritual thing and the legal contract was for "civil unions" and they allowed more than 2 people in a civil union?
Mikal says2013-09-09T16:14:18.8863091-05:00
Marriage is defined as commitment between two people. A legal contract if you will, that entails and represents commitment. You are signing a contract that says, you will not cheat, hurt, or leave that person to you die. Granted that is rarely fulfilled, but why go into marriage with the idea of breaching that contract. If you want to insinuate that, remove the contract to begin with and don't sign it.
Mikal says2013-09-09T16:14:19.2885589-05:00
Marriage is defined as commitment between two people. A legal contract if you will, that entails and represents commitment. You are signing a contract that says, you will not cheat, hurt, or leave that person to you die. Granted that is rarely fulfilled, but why go into marriage with the idea of breaching that contract. If you want to insinuate that, remove the contract to begin with and don't sign it.
Mikal says2013-09-09T16:31:04.3066858-05:00
Actually Mastur instead of going back and forth on here. Lets do a debate, make the challenge and send it to me. "Polygamy should be legal in the United States". I will accept it
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T16:42:57.5641906-05:00
The commitment can be between more than 2 people. Marriage being commitment between two people is roman invention. Since the beginning the people has polygamy relations. And also all mammals are polygamist. Homo Sapiens are mammals, so why they cant have a polygamy?!
Mikal says2013-09-09T16:47:53.2022647-05:00
"And also all mammals are polygamist. Homo Sapiens are mammals, so why they cant have a polygamy?! That statement just made me want to punch myself in the face. Animals also eat their own Sh@t, that does not mean it is healthy for them or healthy for us to try. That is not even considering the effects of culture that play a part in this. I extend the same challenge to you, that I extended to Mastur. Instead of going back and forth on here, I will accept a debate with the aforementioned resolution.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T19:08:04.6767705-05:00
I mean common properties of mammals, they give birth, milk and males has more than one spouse. So why human beings (at least males) cannot have more than one spouse.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-09T19:58:57.7802829-05:00
"Polygamy is horrible and will surely invoke God's wrath. Besides, what kind of person would want to share their spouse with multiple other people. It's sickening. Posted by: AmericanNationalist" Legislations in secular countries has nothing to do with religion. It must be the choice of people. The government and the legislative branch cannot be religious.
tahir.imanov says2013-09-12T07:37:49.2667847-05:00
This goes to who thinks polygamy invokes God's wrath: How many wives did King Solomon have? Answer is around 300. How did he handle 300 mother-in-laws?
tahir.imanov says2013-09-17T19:12:25.4399414-05:00
Biologically speaking purpose of marriage is reproduction. All living things engage in order to reproduce, so if you have more that one wife then you will have (if everything is OK with you) many off-springs, so that your species could go on.
Yevon says2014-01-01T20:56:59.8443112-06:00
Polygamy will destroy marriage? Those that use this argument seem to always ignore the fact that he rate of divorce among straight, monogamous couples is already above 50 percent here in America.
HeavyReader says2014-05-16T09:06:30.6509056-05:00
I personally don't plan on marrying more than one person but hey, everyone gets their choice I believe.
Katpie says2014-05-26T13:41:06.8943417-05:00
I don't believe polygamy is right, and what I don't like even more is when people tell me that Mormons currently practice it.
Jingram994 says2014-05-26T23:00:14.7371549-05:00
I didn't notice this before now (somehow...), but I'd just like to point out a few flaws, tahir. I apologize if this is way too late to be of interest to you; "I mean common properties of mammals, they give birth, milk and males has more than one spouse. So why human beings (at least males) cannot have more than one spouse." Humans are also mammals, and in nature we are not naturally polygamous. There is a reason that we are hardwired to get jealous and angry when our sexual partner is with another sexual partner. So that doesn't really hold up to close inspection. "This goes to who thinks polygamy invokes God's wrath: How many wives did King Solomon have? Answer is around 300. How did he handle 300 mother-in-laws?" So? The bible is an absolutely *horrible* source of morality and legislative ideas. The fact that someone in antiquity had a lot of wives is not a 'go ahead' for it being 'okay'. "Biologically speaking purpose of marriage is reproduction. All living things engage in order to reproduce, so if you have more that one wife then you will have (if everything is OK with you) many off-springs, so that your species could go on." That is simply not true at all. The purpose of marriage is commitment to a single sexual and romantic partner. You don't need to be married to reproduce, and reproduction is not a necessary part of marriage. If this were true, then infertile people, people who don't want children and old people who have not successfully reproduced would not be allowed to become married/would have their existing marriages broken up. Reproduction and marriage are simply not interrelated at all. Strictly speaking, but in the modern world even *sex* and reproduction aren't necessarily related.
tahir.imanov says2014-05-31T10:12:15.0703704-05:00
@jingram994 - nice argument.
Jingram994 says2014-06-03T04:58:19.9679641-05:00
Eh. I though someone might be interested to hear what I had to say.

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.