Quantcast

Should polygamy be legalized in the United States if all parties involved agree to get married?

Simmering Frog 2012/05/15 00:36:20
Yes
No
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/15 00:43:44
    No
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +18
    Absolutely not. Such a policy will likely start a civil war between the left-out men and the harem gatherers.

    "How I wish I'd called him that. Right to his face!
    "Libertine! And while I'm on the subject, Sire,
    "There are certain goings-on about this place
    "That I wish to tell you I do not admire!"

    Rogers and Hammerstein.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Yoru 2012/05/15 00:57:59
    Yes
    Yoru
    +2
    consenting adults should have the ability to marry one another without having to ask permission from others to do so.
  • ray Yoru 2012/05/15 01:44:08
    ray
    +1
    They can do that now . It is only when the go for someone else's wallet or attempt to draft others into the conversation that there is resistance.
  • Yoru ray 2012/05/15 03:19:28
    Yoru
    +1
    Well actually they dont. Which i feel should be obvious given the nature of the original question, along side same-sex marriage.
  • ray Yoru 2012/05/15 10:46:54
    ray
    Name the state that any two persons cannot get a willing Shaman / priest / cleric or best friend to hold a ceremony and announce a couple married .
  • Yoru ray 2012/05/15 21:58:36
    Yoru
    Sure, if it was accepted that those same couples could get legally recognizable rights and benefits like everyone else already does.
  • SamTheSlayer [Codename: Duc... 2012/05/15 00:57:16
    Yes
    SamTheSlayer [Codename: Duchess]
    +1
    I think government should stay out of marriage all together.
    And if parties involved agree on a polygamous marriage, I don't see a reason not to allow it.
  • Steve King 2012/05/15 00:55:29
    No
    Steve King
    +2
    Legalize polygamy and then we will have a Muslim issue like you could never imagine.
  • ancient... Steve King 2012/05/15 01:06:12
    ancientmath
    Except in this country, every individual has the right to leave the marriage at will. It used to be controlled by complete Christianity rule that only the man could initiate the divorce. A lot has changed since American women have learned to stand up for themselves.
  • Steve King ancient... 2012/05/15 03:30:29
    Steve King
    +1
    While I agree with you, based on Western values. However, Islam rejects western values.
  • Bald N Beautiful 2012/05/15 00:53:28
    Yes
    Bald N Beautiful
    +3
    IF THE PARTIES AGREE TO THE SHARING OF ONE MAN THEN THAT'S BETWEEN THEM AND GOD, BUT AS FAR AS MOST RELATIONSHIP CLAIM TO BE MANOGAMOUS, THEY ARE NOT AND ALTHOUGH POLYGAMY IS NOT FOR ME, I DO RESPECT IT MORE THAN MANOGAMOUS RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE AT LEAST THEY ARE BEING HONEST. THERE IS NO HONESTY IN MANOGAMOUS RELATIONSHIP, IT IS PUT OUT HERE AS THOUGH THEY ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING WHEN ALL THE WHILE THEY ARE CREAPING AND LYING AND CHEATING.
  • SamTheS... Bald N ... 2012/05/15 00:58:26
    SamTheSlayer [Codename: Duchess]
    Much better alternative to betraying your partner.
  • Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/05/15 00:53:27
    Yes
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +2
    Nobody's business, but the ones involved.
  • Mandy 2012/05/15 00:53:04
    Yes
    Mandy
    +2
    I see no reason why not.
  • Simmeri... Mandy 2012/05/15 01:10:58
    Simmering Frog
    So define marriage then.
  • Mandy Simmeri... 2012/05/15 01:26:17 (edited)
    Mandy
    Well, if polygamy were legally recognized the definition would read something like this: The consensual unification of two or more adults in a legally recognized relationship.
  • tweet_tweet 2012/05/15 00:49:39
    Yes
    tweet_tweet
    +3
    I don't see how this hurts me or anyone not involved in the arrangement.
  • Simmeri... tweet_t... 2012/05/15 01:11:09
    Simmering Frog
    Define marriage then.
  • tweet_t... Simmeri... 2012/05/15 01:17:57
    tweet_tweet
    Marriage: something I never want to be involved in...ever
  • 001 2012/05/15 00:49:08
    Yes
    001
    +3
    I would never agree on such a relationship myself. I am monogamous, I was raised with those ideas and it feels good to me this way. There are also people who were raised with different ideas. Just because their ideas are different, doesn't mean they are bad. If all people in the relationship, marriage or not, agree to a polygamous relationship, I do not see how it can harm anyone and I do not see why it is illegal.
  • Rusty Bubbles 2012/05/15 00:48:58
    No
    Rusty Bubbles
    +4
    Polygamy is one wife too many. Monogamy is the same. - Oscar Wilde
  • Hank 2012/05/15 00:48:47
    No
    Hank
    +4
    Can you imagine some poor b*stard with 8 or 9 mothers-in-law? Attorneys would have a field day when it comes to handling divorce proceedings with several plaintiffs and one defendant. Why would anyone want to have more than one spouse? Dealing with one is a full time vocation for many of us. Talk about Post Traumatic Stress !
  • Anpadh 2012/05/15 00:46:12
    Yes
    Anpadh
    +1
    Legalizing polygamy will actually reduce polygamy. Many people today have multiple partners. They will have fewer partners if they are required to marry multiple partners.
  • Donald ... Anpadh 2012/05/31 17:24:52
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    No one is talking about requiring anyone to marry multiple partners. The question was whether or not polygamy should be allowed.
  • Anpadh Donald ... 2012/06/03 14:26:23
    Anpadh
    Donald, it seems to me that you are not clear on the concept of polygamy. Polygamy means marrying multiple partners. Mongoamy means marrying only one partner.
  • Donald ... Anpadh 2012/06/04 13:52:37
    Donald Eric Kesler
    I am very clear on the concept of polygamy.

    You wrote, "They [people with multiple partners] will have fewer partners if they are required to marry multiple partners."

    It was your use of the word "required" that elicited my response. No one is advocating that marrying multiple partners should be required. Some people, like myself, are advocating that marrying multiple partners should be allowed.

    There is a difference between what is required and what is allowed. U.S. citizens are allowed to own a gun; however, In most of the United States a citizen is not required to own a gun.
  • Anpadh Donald ... 2012/06/11 04:09:55
    Anpadh
    You are required to marry more than one person at a time if you want to be a polygamist. That's what the word "polygamy" means. To practice monogamy, you are REQUIRED to have one partner and one partner only. To practice polygamy, you are REQUIRED to have multiple partners. If you have only one partner then you are practicing monogamy, not polygamy.
  • Donald ... Anpadh 2012/06/11 08:43:02
    Donald Eric Kesler
    All anyone is proposing is allowing polygamy to be legal.

    Once again, you wrote, "They [people with multiple partners] will have fewer partners if they are required to marry multiple partners."

    Of course, those who wish to engage in polygamy would have multiple partners. However, those who have multiple sexual partners would not be required to marry any of them. No one is required to marry anyone.
  • Anpadh Donald ... 2012/06/24 17:00:58
    Anpadh
    You are not practicing polygamy if you do not MARRY your multiple partners. Millions of single men have multiple partners, through their lives. Some of those single men eventually marry and some do not. In either case, they are not polygamists. To be a polygamist, you are REQUIRED to marry and you are REQUIRED to have multiple partners. An unmarried person is simply single. A person MARRIED to one person is a monogamist. A person MARRIED to more than one person is a polygamist.
  • Donald ... Anpadh 2012/06/25 14:42:24
    Donald Eric Kesler
    I am going to spell this out for you one last time.

    You wrote, "They [people with multiple partners] will have fewer partners if they are required to marry multiple partners."

    This is the sentence I was responding to way back on May 31st. As I wrote then, no one is talking about requiring anyone to marry multiple partners.

    Of course, a polygamist will have multiple partners. Everyone understands this. Everyone knows that to be a polygamist, one is required marry multiple people. No one is disputing this fact. Do you understand? No one is disputing the definition of polygamy.

    I merely sought to clarify your position. The way you worded your earlier sentence, it conveyed the idea that you thought people would be forced to participate in polygamous marriages. Forcing people to participate in polygamous marriages is not something that anyone here is advocating.

    Back on May 31st, I was seeking clarification for your statement. Today, I don’t give a damn what you were attempting to convey.
  • Anpadh Donald ... 2012/06/28 02:28:40
    Anpadh
    So you were just too stupid to understand what i explained to you three times.
  • Donald ... Anpadh 2012/06/28 14:18:46
    Donald Eric Kesler
    Yes. That is correct. I was too stupid to understand what you explained three times. I am sorry.
  • david Donald ... 2014/06/15 03:26:45
    david
    +1
    its bruce wayne
  • david Donald ... 2014/06/15 03:26:58
    david
    +1
    its batman
  • aherbert 2012/05/15 00:45:25
    Yes
    aherbert
    +2
    Sure why not ... if it is a marriage with consenting adults.... and they can wear their magic underwear too...

    mitt romney magic underwear mitt romney magic underwear
  • ««Gingey, the Master Debate... 2012/05/15 00:45:15
    Yes
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
    +4
    If they are all of the age of consent, yes.
  • Yes
    Jerry (Iron Priest)☮ R ☮ P ☮ 201
    +5
    If an adult chooses to marry someone who is already married, as moronic as that is, that person should have the right.
  • Nam Era Vet #1 DNA TLC 2012/05/15 00:43:48
    No
    Nam Era Vet #1 DNA TLC
    +5
    Huge can of legal worms and divorce cases will be an even bigger mess
  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/15 00:43:44
    No
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +18
    Absolutely not. Such a policy will likely start a civil war between the left-out men and the harem gatherers.

    "How I wish I'd called him that. Right to his face!
    "Libertine! And while I'm on the subject, Sire,
    "There are certain goings-on about this place
    "That I wish to tell you I do not admire!"

    Rogers and Hammerstein.
  • sha_lyn68 Temlako... 2012/05/15 15:42:43 (edited)
    sha_lyn68
    +1
    Why are you assuming that only men would have multiple spouses and would be "harem gatherers"?
  • Temlako... sha_lyn68 2012/05/15 18:37:40
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +9
    Because I have never once observed "polyandry," unless you count "prostitution."

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/20 09:58:43

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals