What's wrong with polygamy?

Question

We always talk about marriage between 2 people, man and woman, or now, man and man. What's to stop the courts to legalize the marriage of 4 or 5 people? Please don't call me evil or dumb i was just asking, to see people's opinions.

it could be any combination, 2 men 2 women if you want, or 3 men 1 women. whatever you can think up of

Answer 1

Polygamy is illegal. There are laws specifically making it a crime. In contrast to same-sex marriage, there are simply laws stating they will not be recognized or performed within certain states. Same-sex marriage is not a criminal act.

Answer 2

Druidic law recognizes both polygamy (husband with multiple wives) and polyandry (wife with multiple husbands). Marriage is considered a civil contract, like a business partnership, not a Divinely Inspired union of souls. Things like property distribution, responsibility for the any children, terms for adding other spouses, whether or not spouses may have sex outside the marriage, and so forth, are negotiated in advance and included in the pre-nup. We've been doing it that way for thousands of years, still do subject to modifications imposed by the government, and it works fine. Our laws also recognize same-sex and line marriages, as well as marriages with expiration dates. The concept of marriage as 1 man+1 woman monogamous for life with the man as Lord and Master, is a uniquely Christian invention going back no more than 8 or 10 centuries. It is, unfortunately, a common assumption that whatever your Grandmother did has been Universal custom world-wide since the beginning of time, an assumption which we see every time some fundie starts a sentence with "Marriage has always been..."

Answer 3

Its a fair question. The only real thing I see wrong with it is that there is a law or two that defines it as wrong.

Historically, in areas where women were few, men were compelled to share their women. That didn't often happen but there was another manifestation of social compensation, matriarchal societies, where women had social power or prominence (but it could also have arisen by momma's boy leadership that became the rule in subsequent generations. In the case of men having multiple wives there are two historical social factors supporting such. Rich and powerful people would accumulate wives as prestige items, quantity back then defined the trophies a man had, as opposed to quality of a trophy wife today. The other side of the coin is if the wife lost a husband, disease, war, hazards of work, etc. There was no social support for widows except in supporting children, but that assumes they were able to work and not infants or toddlers. Then we come to the next possibility, which in the 1960's was called open marriage. A supposedly legitimized and formalize group-grope. Then you run into a risk that we don't have a social precedent for with our monogamy-preferring society (even if it is serial monogamy at times). Fred is straight and marries Gail. Gail is bi and suggest marrying Jane as well. Fred's all for that, but Jane also wants to add Mark. Mark is fond of Jane but fonder of men, so Mark is looking at Fred. Fred, suddenly finds his utopia turning unbearable because he has no interest in doing Mark and no intention of letting Mark do him.

Naw, as promiscuous as we currently are, why not just play musical beds and keep going as we are, eh?

Answer 4

The problem is: Where does it end? Realize that married people get many many benefits. Hospital visits, tax breaks, the ability to be claimed on insurance, and other benefits provided by companies, and in some cases by the government.

Imagine if you will 6 people get married to one person. This one person claims them ALL on medical, dental, health, vision, and life insurance with the company. They are ALL claimed on taxes as dependents as well. That company is paying HUGE amounts in benefits because of one employee.

Imagine the hardship that would have on the stock market, not to mention the individual companies. Why, what would stop you from marrying all your friends just to get them some medical coverage?

What would companies do in this case? Withdrawal ALL benefits, or allow only the employee to claim themselves, and no others.

What would the military do? As you know when people are stationed oversees they can take their family with them. Is the military to allow one to take all of your spouses, and all of your children? If you have 5 wives and 2 kids each that is a HUGE amount of people. Imagine figuring out the logistics of that through ALL of the people in the military that have families like that.

Forget sociological morality, It could be an economic catastrophe.

Answer 5

I think because it makes people vulnerable. In my eyes it seems that its only acceptable if men do it for one thing. This leaves young women vulnerable to these men... at least in the cases I have seen in america. It is used as a vicious de-humanizing sort of forced thing on young women.

I dont really agree with it. I think that marriage should be between 2 people. If they love each other then they become one. partners... lovers... they are a pair. I dont think the sex matters. I dont think 3 or 10 partners in marriage is fair. It becomes a power thing for the one marrying all the women or men. How many can you get? Its selfish.

Answer 6

Well if that's what they want...Personally I'd see it to be a legal nightmare. Think about it, 3 people and one is incapacitated, no will, one spouse wants them to remain alive on machines one says no and wants to pull the plug. Who wins?
Another "triad" and one wants a divorce, should the other two pay spousal support?
And so on, and so on...don't limit the number to 3...think of that on a scale of 4 or 5 people involved.
You think marriage and divorce tie up the courts now??

Answer 7

I don't see a problem with it, so long as all parties involved are agreed on it. The thing is, it gets messy when legal rights get applied to multiple parties. For example, which of my three spouses should be in charge of my will? Who gets to speak for me if I'm in a coma? There are a number of legal issues which only work in a two-person marriage. They could feasibly be changed, but it would be difficult.

Answer 8

The reason why there is no poly marriages in america is that it simply doesn't work. People go into it thinking it's a big swinger's party, and they don't realize that not only does everyone need to love each other, but everyone has to respect each other as well. So far, every attempt at Poly marriage has failed.

Answer 9

I think it's a good question. And personally I think family law has a big problem. If I had two women move in with me and I supported them for a year, then they could both leave and sue me for support as common law partners.
So even though I could never legally marry both I can sure legally be obligated to support both.
Hopefully it's worth it!

Answer 10

Isn't what you are asking called swinging?
Polygamy is a religious concept and the marriage is not really legal, so they can seek welfare, with kids more money.
There is too much corruption and fraud on the government.
The women are dropout fools and pawns manipulated by the men.
That is just part. child exploitation .
If they did not break the basics of the law and were self- sufficient. I care less! fact sign me up for 2 with or without families attached. A contract is required and NO ax murderers.

Answer 11

Nothing wrong with it at all. In fact polygamy is legal in some countries already, and in others a person with only one wife is looked on as being weak and unable to provide for his family. It's only religious views that are stopping it from ever happening, and since the legal system bows to religious views (yes I know about separation of church and state but who is kidding who) its unlikely that it ever will.