User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 13988
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:57 pm

Another political hot potato involving marriage rights as well as Mormanism:

Quote:

The polygamous family, stars of the TLC show "Sister Wives," has sued Utah and the county they fled from, hoping to persuade a federal judge to overturn the state's bigamy law as unconstitutional.

The case could potentially decriminalize a way of life for tens of thousands of self-described Mormon fundamentalists, most of whom live in Utah where bigamy is a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

The state, meanwhile, has publicly said it won't prosecute consenting adult polygamists unless there are other crimes involved, but insists the law doesn't overreach.

Seems to me one day polygamy will be legal, just not sure when.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 2955
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:08 pm

TLC actually made a reality show on polygamy ?   

Anyone remember when they had the extreme machines series ???
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:17 pm

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Seems to me one day polygamy will be legal, just not sure when.

One man treating several women as his property to aquire and dispose of at will.

There is a medieval concept whose time has come again!!

Retrograde court challenges and legislation may make it legal.. it still a concept that should stay in the dark ages!!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 13988
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:22 pm

Quoting stealthz (Reply 2):
One man treating several women as his property to aquire and dispose of at will.

There is a medieval concept whose time has come again!!

These days it seems to be quite the opposite.
Guy meets girl, they marry, they divorce, he's broke, she's set for life, in many cases.

Do you know what the real penalty for polygamy is?
Two wives!
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
northstardc4m
Posts: 2724
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:13 pm

I personally think Government should get out of marriage completely.


Polygamy, Polyandry, Gay Marriage, who cares... make it all a common law arrangement done by testaments and legal documents.

Fixes so many problems in society for equality.

-DONE-
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:18 pm

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 4):
I personally think Government should get out of marriage completely.


Polygamy, Polyandry, Gay Marriage, who cares... make it all a common law arrangement done by testaments and legal documents.

      

Could not agree more.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6079
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:46 pm

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 4):
Polygamy, Polyandry, Gay Marriage, who cares... make it all a common law arrangement done by testaments and legal documents.

Fixes so many problems in society for equality.
OK, so who is the "number one"? Who gets to make the life decisions? There can only be one.

And that person is the true "partner". The theory behind a union via either marriage or whatever is that the parties are "equal" (yes they can view that they have different levels and responsibilities within the marriage but LEGALLY by view of law, they are each equal to make decisions for the other if incapacitated). That isn't ever the case in a group, some have more authority than others, some join later than others and so have varying levels of "accrued interest" in whatever value is create in the group, etc. Once you go beyond the first "pair" is starts to get complicated but there is always a "core" pair that are above the rest.

This is where a true "union" of people is at its core between two people.

Tugg

[Edited 2012-07-27 09:17:54]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 4:48 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
This is where a true "union" of people is at its core between two people.

Who am I to judge whether a true union is between two people, three people, or 24 people?

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
OK, so who is the "number one"? Who gets to make the life decisions? There can only be one.

I see no reason why three people can't agree on life decisions. It migth be harder, but just because something is difficult doesn't mean I want to deny someone the right to do it.

There are people who have open marriages, people who have multiple girl/boyfriends, people who are bisexual, whatever. I don't really see this as any different.

Hell, at least with three people, you can have a majority!
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
David L
Posts: 8552
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:08 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 7):
Hell, at least with three people, you can have a majority!

A menageority.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:41 pm

Quoting David L (Reply 8):
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 7):
Hell, at least with three people, you can have a majority!

A menageority.

You came out of hibernation to say THAT???!!!
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
LMP737
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:44 pm

Quoting alberchico (Reply 1):
TLC actually made a reality show on polygamy ?

Anyone remember when they had the extreme machines series ???

Both TLC and The History Channel have turned into crap.

What gets me about that show is they get this surfer looking guy who has this "It's cool man" air about him. Why not someone like Warren Jeffs, looks like a troll, who has sex with underage girls? Or stories about how young men in these polygamy groups are excommunicated over the slightest infraction because the older men see them as a threat? Guess that would not get the ratings they like.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
bhill
Posts: 1314
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Well, if it is ever legalized, ya better keep track of the gene pool....
Carpe Pices
 
David L
Posts: 8552
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:28 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 9):

I am suitably chastised. However, as I recall, you didn't like the King of Queens, either.   
 
dcaviation
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:26 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:32 pm

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 10):
Why not someone like Warren Jeffs, looks like a troll, who has sex with underage girls? Or stories about how young men in these polygamy groups are excommunicated over the slightest infraction because the older men see them as a threat?

They have show about him and young men in these polygamy groups. Its on Nat Geo and its called "I survived Cult".
 
smittyone
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:55 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:09 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
OK, so who is the "number one"? Who gets to make the life decisions? There can only be one.

And that person is the true "partner". The theory behind a union via either marriage or whatever is that the parties are "equal" (yes they can view that they have different levels and responsibilities within the marriage but LEGALLY by view of law, they are each equal to make decisions for the other if incapacitated). That isn't ever the case in a group, some have more authority than others, some join later than others and so have varying levels of "accrued interest" in whatever value is create in the group, etc. Once you go beyond the first "pair" is starts to get complicated but there is always a "core" pair that are above the rest.

This is where a true "union" of people is at its core between two people.

Tugg

All this may be true, but "Who cares" is the point. At the end of the day it should be THEIR problem, not the people's problem. I resent the fact that the gov't I'm funding would waste its time on dictating the nuts and bolts of how people should live their lives.

My view is that if someone is stupid enough to accumulate more than one person who could potentially cut off his/her life support, then that is the price they pay for legitimizing multiple bedtime options!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7699
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:47 pm

What about allowing that, but banning the cult ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:41 pm

Quoting David L (Reply 12):
I am suitably chastised. However, as I recall, you didn't like the King of Queens, either.

If you're talking about the show, you are correct. Terrible. Don't remember a reference here, though.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 10):
What gets me about that show is they get this surfer looking guy who has this "It's cool man" air about him. Why not someone like Warren Jeffs, looks like a troll, who has sex with underage girls? Or stories about how young men in these polygamy groups are excommunicated over the slightest infraction because the older men see them as a threat? Guess that would not get the ratings they like.

So they can't show people living supposedly happy lives? They have to show the bad side of everything?
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:42 pm

If people want to live in polygamous or polyandrous or polyamorous relationships, I have no problem with it.

I do have a problem with legally sanctioning such relationships without having a clear framework in place for who gets to make decisions on whose kids, property, divorce, etc. Bipartite marriages can be pretty uniform from that perspective. But once you get into multipartite marriages, it gets really confusing. What happens when the single husband dies, leaving five wives? Who inherits what? Can they remarry? It's a total mare's nest from a legal perspective and that's the only reason that I don't support legally recognizing these unions. "Morality" and "tradition" are irrelevant to me. Polygamy *is* traditional in a lot of the world and was traditional even in Judeo-Christian history. How many wives did Solomon have? Let's not even get into the concubines.

If they want to make their own legal arrangements, that's fine. But a marriage is a cookie-cutter arrangement based around two people.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:49 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
If they want to make their own legal arrangements, that's fine. But a marriage is a cookie-cutter arrangement based around two people.

I hate to say it Doc, but you know what that sounds like, right?

"Marriage is a cookie-cutter arrangement based around a man and a woman."
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:27 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 18):
I hate to say it Doc, but you know what that sounds like, right?

"Marriage is a cookie-cutter arrangement based around a man and a woman."

Sounds like it, but it isn't. I just laid out some very cogent legal and logistical reasons why it shouldn't be done. Opponents of gay marriage, under oath, have been unable to list even one.

Now, if someone can come up with a general arrangement that will allow any number of consenting adults of any gender to enter into a group marriage while dealing with all of the complications I've mentioned (and those I haven't), I'll lead the parade supporting it. Good luck to whomever that may be.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:38 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
Sounds like it, but it isn't. I just laid out some very cogent legal and logistical reasons why it shouldn't be done. Opponents of gay marriage, under oath, have been unable to list even one.

I understand. But sound bytes are sound bytes....
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 13988
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:57 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
But once you get into multipartite marriages, it gets really confusing. What happens when the single husband dies, leaving five wives? Who inherits what? Can they remarry?

There must be some things that can be learned even from ancient times, or from what is done currently in places like Saudia Arabia.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
It's a total mare's nest from a legal perspective and that's the only reason that I don't support legally recognizing these unions.

Bipartite marriage is a total mare's nest from a legal perspective, and yet there's a thriving services community out there set up to handle it. I think you should reconsider your point on this topic, it doesn't make much sense to me.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:12 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):
ere must be some things that can be learned even from ancient times, or from what is done currently in places like Saudia Arabia.

The trouble is that if you only legalize polyGAMY, but not polyANDRY or polyAMORY, you now have gender discrimination. Let's posit that it's essentially inevitable that gay marriage will become legal within the next few years. It's not going to fly to allow a man to marry three wives, but not a woman to marry three husbands, or three men to get married. So at that point, any historical examples fly out the window.

Furthermore, the historical examples of how marriage law was handled was pretty medieval (now that's begging the question, innit?   ). In some systems, a wife could be divorced by saying "I divorce you!" three times. In others, a man could whip or beat a nagging wife (oh, how many men wish that were still the case?   ). Certainly, it wasn't a marriage of equals.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):

Bipartite marriage is a total mare's nest from a legal perspective, and yet there's a thriving services community out there set up to handle it. I think you should reconsider your point on this topic, it doesn't make much sense to me.

A marriage is a single agreement between two consenting adults. Because there are only two adults, if they break up, they wind up single. Their stuff and children (and divorce is mostly about "stuff" and children) must be divided between two people. That makes matters relatively simple. And even then, divorce and marriage law are a horrible mare's nest as it is.

So now you have to deal with what to do when Mary and Jack want to stay together, but Pat wants to go his/her separate way. Or what happens when all three want to break up? There are an enormous (possibly infinite?) number of potential combinations and thus, complications. Can you imagine how byzantine the law would have to be?

Like I said, if someone can come up with a viable legal solution, I'll lead the parade for legal recognition. I just doubt that anyone can.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:44 am

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
The state, meanwhile, has publicly said it won't prosecute consenting adult polygamists unless there are other crimes involved, but insists the law doesn't overreach.

This is going to be pretty bad time for Mormons to bring this up. They have a Mormon running for President and a lot of the religious right are going to be far from impressed. Let's see if it becomes a plank on the GOP Platform.   

As for me, I found it can be a challenge to keep one wife somewhat happy for 43 years. No way would I want multiple wives. But then I must admit that I was fortunate to have been able to marry a woman who was smarter than I am and who would be impossible for me to match. If some Mormons needs multiple wives then I believe that they just did an incompetent in selecting the first one.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:45 am

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
And that person is the true "partner". The theory behind a union via either marriage or whatever is that the parties are "equal" (yes they can view that they have different levels and responsibilities within the marriage but LEGALLY by view of law, they are each equal to make decisions for the other if incapacitated). That isn't ever the case in a group, some have more authority than others, some join later than others and so have varying levels of "accrued interest" in whatever value is create in the group, etc. Once you go beyond the first "pair" is starts to get complicated but there is always a "core" pair that are above the rest.

I don't know, that could happen, but there can be a completely dominant and submissive person in a bigamous relationship... I say let consenting adults do whatever. If a woman wants to give up power and enter into a polygamous marriage (or bigamous marriage for that matter,) let her, it's her choice.

I think the government should get out of the business of marriage all together. Let people set their inheritance for whoever. I can set it for my mom and dad if I want, for my future wife, for my friends... who cares. Marriage will just be a word... churches can perform marriages to whoever they want, a man can decide to "marry" a man (for marriage will be a ceremony, defined by him.)

If someone wants to marry dogs or toasters, who cares!? Under the system I wrote, the government wouldn't write down anything about marriages, it's just what you say it is. He obviously wouldn't be able to set his inheritance to his dog or toaster, as they are not consenting adults, and as long as he doesn't sexually abuse his dog, that can be his husband/wife. Or toaster wife. Who cares.

The only problem I could see is when you get to insurance and job benefits... obviously jobs will want 1 clearly defined spouse, otherwise a pilot could just "marry" all his/her friends and get them all non-rev privileges. I'll have to think about that one.

To sum up, it would give more freedom to people... they could define what marriage is for them. Religious institutions can continue to marry man and woman or man+women, men+woman, man+car, etc. The toaster weirdos will probably be weird regardless if they "marry" their toasters or not...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4051
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:46 am

I find it profoundly ironic that people that were getting their panties in a twist about objections to the usage of the word marriage "equality" in the NZ thread are so opposed to this...

Then again, if a child can have multiple (as in, more than 2) parents, as is being proposed in California, not sure why they shouldn't be able to have more than one spouse.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 4):

I personally think Government should get out of marriage completely.

Agree (other than notarizing any contract signed between two consenting parties and making it enforceable in a court of law,of course).

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 4):
Polygamy, Polyandry, Gay Marriage, who cares... make it all a common law arrangement done by testaments and legal documents.

And don't give them any tax breaks. And let me direct my forced contributions to Social Security to whoever the hell I want if I die before my time (or better yet, don't make me contribute).
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 4:17 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 23):
This is going to be pretty bad time for Mormons to bring this up. They have a Mormon running for President and a lot of the religious right are going to be far from impressed. Let's see if it becomes a plank on the GOP Platform.

Just an FYI (which you may already know): "fundamentalist Mormon" groups that believe in polygamy are not part of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (which is the major, well-known, Mormon denomination, of which Romney is a member).
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
flyingturtle
Posts: 4619
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 4:46 am

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
OK, so who is the "number one"? Who gets to make the life decisions? There can only be one.

Well, in Switzerland we have a government that works exactly like this. 
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 7):
I see no reason why three people can't agree on life decisions. It migth be harder, but just because something is difficult doesn't mean I want to deny someone the right to do it.

  

I know three people who are in a relationship together. Two males are in a relationship to the same female, and they decided to give it a try. The first thing they had to agree upon was that in a relationship, nobody is somebody else's property. And like knowledge, love is something that gets more valuable when you share it.

They have had hard times with arduous discussions, to straight things out. But all three are great people, and I can't see any reason why this ménage à trois would fail.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 25):
Then again, if a child can have multiple (as in, more than 2) parents, as is being proposed in California, not sure why they shouldn't be able to have more than one spouse.

Why not? It depends on the "stepfathers" or "stepmothers" if they are up to their tasks! There are always people that fail, and there are always people that do a top-notch "job" as (ex-)husbands, (ex-)wives, fathers, brothers, friends. It just starts with remaining on speaking terms if you end a relationship.

We are free to change everything except those pesky natural laws. 


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18255
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:31 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 25):
I find it profoundly ironic that people that were getting their panties in a twist about objections to the usage of the word marriage "equality" in the NZ thread are so opposed to this...

I started the NZ thread (and used the words marriage equality) and I'm not opposed to it if that's what people want to do. I would expect strong legal provisions for the protection of the spouses, though.

It amuses me that one of the constant (religious) objections to marriage equality - as in "same-sex" marriage - is that marriage was between a man and a woman.

Yet the Old Testament smiles sweetly on the polygamy of the Patriarchs.

I don't understand the Mormon position, though, as I believe polygamy was widely practised and then dropped - in order to get the financial benefits of statehood, perhaps?

mariner

[Edited 2012-07-28 22:33:06]
aeternum nauta
 
LMP737
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:44 pm

Quoting dcaviation (Reply 13):
They have show about him and young men in these polygamy groups. Its on Nat Geo and its called "I survived Cult".

I stand corrected.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 16):
So they can't show people living supposedly happy lives? They have to show the bad side of everything?

They already have that show, it's called Sister Wives. Why don't they have a weekly show that shows the other side of this story?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 22):
The trouble is that if you only legalize polyGAMY, but not polyANDRY or polyAMORY, you now have gender discrimination. Let's posit that it's essentially inevitable that gay marriage will become legal within the next few years. It's not going to fly to allow a man to marry three wives, but not a woman to marry three husbands, or three men to get married. So at that point, any historical examples fly out the window.

This whole Sister Wives thing has more to do with religious fundamentalism than marriage rights. Because if you were to ask that guy if they win their case does that mean one of his wives, or daughters, can marry multiple men? Or how about one of his sons marrying three other guys? Being a member of a fundamentalist Christian sect I can guess what his answer is going to be.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:16 pm

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 29):
This whole Sister Wives thing has more to do with religious fundamentalism than marriage rights. Because if you were to ask that guy if they win their case does that mean one of his wives, or daughters, can marry multiple men? Or how about one of his sons marrying three other guys? Being a member of a fundamentalist Christian sect I can guess what his answer is going to be.

I know that, and that's why it's not going to fly unless it's legalized for as many adults of whichever gender they like.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 10018
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:24 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
If they want to make their own legal arrangements, that's fine. But a marriage is a cookie-cutter arrangement based around two people.

Surprised at you Doc how the hell can you support gay marriage and not polygamy. What give gays more right to marriage than folks who want to marry more than one person?
 
LMP737
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:30 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 30):
I know that, and that's why it's not going to fly unless it's legalized for as many adults of whichever gender they like.

The second you do that be prepared for the s%t storm from the religous right. Including Mr Sister Wives guy.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:48 pm

I encounter this everyday at work.

In MN we have Somali men who will have three wives, only be legally married to one of them and the other two will be considered single moms sucking up welfare benefits despite the fact that he spends every third or fourth night over there. My office had to actually hire a full-time employee to respond to requests for these men's financial information from various government agencies. It is further complicated by the tendency for Somali men to be named Mohamed Mohamed and have January 1st as their birthday. Which one is the pappy?

I think there should be some sort of legal recognition for multiple-spouse marriages if only to make the men instead of the taxpayers take care of their copious amounts of children.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:02 pm

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 29):
They already have that show, it's called Sister Wives. Why don't they have a weekly show that shows the other side of this story?

Because that's not how TV stations work.

"Oh, we can't put that show about marriage on TV unless we put a show about divorce on there too!"

or

"We show NFL games; I guess we need a show about the guys who have gotten permanently paralyzed/seriously injured playing football!"

is not their line of thinking.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 26):
Just an FYI

The question is if the voters can identify and accept the difference.

There is a difference in the Jewish faith - conservative and reform

Muslims? They are not all radical terrorists, but see if voters will agree.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 31):
how the hell can you support gay marriage and not polygamy.

I'm in a straight marriage, but can understand how Doc can take that position. It is one of two people wanting to spend their lives together, not a situation where some pretty weird guys want multiple women to screw and share the housework. Odd, isn't it, that a lot of these yo-yos want their new wives to be young. No surprise that in some of these groups the young men are kicked out of the group so competition for the younger girls is reduced.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:23 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
not a situation where some pretty weird guys want multiple women to screw and share the housework. Odd, isn't it, that a lot of these yo-yos want their new wives to be young. No surprise that in some of these groups the young men are kicked out of the group so competition for the younger girls is reduced.

That's pretty closed minded, don't you think? There is even an example earlier in this thread describing the relationship between two men and a woman. I can see legal concerns in regards to polygamy, but being against it because you don't like the premise of it is as bad as being against gay marriage for the same reason
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7699
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:44 pm

The thing is that "progressive" people that want to live with several people (polyamory) don't care about marriage, that thing of the past. So people practicing polygamy are pretty much always backwards, something the state shouldn't encourage.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 37):
So people practicing polygamy are pretty much always backwards, something the state shouldn't encourage.

Wow now I really see that both sides of the gay marriage debate have hypocritical stances. So much for open mindedness! (not just you Aesma, there seem to be a lot of other posters)      
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11855
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:05 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 37):
The thing is that "progressive" people that want to live with several people (polyamory) don't care about marriage, that thing of the past. So people practicing polygamy are pretty much always backwards, something the state shouldn't encourage.

What about all the straight, monogamous couples who don't care about marriage? Should the state break them up?
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 13988
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 8:13 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
It is one of two people wanting to spend their lives together, not a situation where some pretty weird guys want multiple women to screw and share the housework.

Personally, I don't see the difference between a guy wants one woman to screw and to do the housework vs many women to screw and to do the housework, as long as everyone involved agrees.

I see Doc's point about how unraveling such unions would be pretty messy, but unraveling the current bipartite unions are messy anyhow, and it should be about what the people want, and not about how difficult it is for the courts to sort out if/when things get ugly.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:28 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):
Wow now I really see that both sides of the gay marriage debate have hypocritical stances.

Because Aesma is "one side of the gay marriage debate?" No, he isn't. So hop off that train because it's not sitting on the rails.

It is not hypocritical to argue for gay marriage and against polygamy. In fact, that is EXACTLY what gay marriage opponents argued; that legalizing gay marriage would clear the way for polygamy. Gay marriage supporters pointed out (rightly) that this is not the case.

And it *ISN'T* "because we don't like it" or Aesma's "they're backward" argument. Those are not valid reasons to oppose multipartite marriages.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 40):
I see Doc's point about how unraveling such unions would be pretty messy, but unraveling the current bipartite unions are messy anyhow, and it should be about what the people want, and not about how difficult it is for the courts to sort out if/when things get ugly.

Given that the people pay for those same courts... But also, it's not that simple. A bipartite marriage is a contract between two individuals, A and B. In the absence of a pre-nuptial agreement, it is a single, uniform agreement. There is only one way for that agreement to be broken, and it winds up with those two people being single. In the case of a multipartite marriage, there are many different ways it could go and the state DOES have a secular interest in avoiding such massive cases. There is also a huge potential for abuse if there is no limit on the size of people entering into a marriage, abuse which is difficult to regulate and enforce.

Also, there is a legalistic reason why it is not a right. In the Loving v. Virginia case, the argument went like this:
"Bobby may marry Susie, but Bobby may not marry Jenny because Bobby is Black." Clear violation of Equal Protection and the Civil Rights Act. In the gay marriage case, the argument is "Bobby may marry Susie, but Bobby may not marry Scott because Bobby is a man." Again, clear violation of Equal Protection clause.

However, in the case of polygam/andr/amory, the argument is: "Bobby may marry Susie, but Bobby and Jenny may not marry Susie because Bobby and Jenny are two people." No law has ever held that being a group of people is a protected class or that groups of people have the same protections and immunities as individuals. Groups, of course, do enjoy some protections, but they do not enjoy the same protections as individuals. For example, groups may not cast a ballot. Groups do not have the right to trial by jury (the individuals in the group do have the right to their own individual jury trials). Etc.

So there are a number of very good secular and legal reasons why multipartite marriages should not be allowed.

By contrast, there are ZERO secular and/or legal reasons why gay marriage should not be allowed. And this has been demonstrated in court after court after court.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
IMissPiedmont
Posts: 6200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:58 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:31 pm

I was having a discussion with someone just the other day regarding polygamy. She didn't understand my point that legaly there is no such thing. Marriage is sanction only by the state and as such you can have only 1 wife, the rest are live in girlfriends and a man can have as many of them as he can get.
The day you stop learning is the day you should die.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:43 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 41):
Because Aesma is "one side of the gay marriage debate?" No, he isn't. So hop off that train because it's not sitting on the rails.

It is not hypocritical to argue for gay marriage and against polygamy. In fact, that is EXACTLY what gay marriage opponents argued; that legalizing gay marriage would clear the way for polygamy. Gay marriage supporters pointed out (rightly) that this is not the case.

And it *ISN'T* "because we don't like it" or Aesma's "they're backward" argument. Those are not valid reasons to oppose multipartite marriages.

If you looked at my posts, I even pointed out that there are more complications with polygamy, I even said:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 36):
I can see legal concerns in regards to polygamy, but being against it because you don't like the premise of it is as bad as being against gay marriage for the same reason

and I was commenting on:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 37):
that thing of the past. So people practicing polygamy are pretty much always backwards, something the state shouldn't encourage.

So the state should comment on what is right or wrong? That's exactly what they are doing when they denied gay marriage. You could easily change the quote to:

"The thing is that "progressive" people that want to live with the same gender (homosexuality) don't care about marriage, that thing of the past"

...so why make gay marriage legal?

THAT is what I found super hypocritical
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2128
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:59 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 22):

The government should not recognize ANY form of marriage...man-woman, same sex, multiple partners...

Marriage is s religious construct that should have always remained religious.

If two or more people want to legally share different assets or responsibilities, they should write a contract to cover the agreement.

The days of Defined benefit plans and private health care are over. Those were the last 2 reasons for government to recognize marriage. Everything else can be covered by contract law and common law.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:11 am

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 44):

     
That's what I was trying (and failing) to say myself, well put!
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:27 am

Here's another vote for no state involvement in marriages. And no preferential tax treatment, either.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:42 am

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 44):
The government should not recognize ANY form of marriage...man-woman, same sex, multiple partners...

Agreed. But they do. And until they don't, then they should recognize gay marriage, but not multipartite marriages.

And frankly, we're never going to do away with it. Whether you call it "marriage" or "domestic partnership" or "glump-glump," it's going to be a contract between two people to share all their stuff, make decisions together, share benefits, etc. etc. etc.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 10018
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:30 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
I'm in a straight marriage, but can understand how Doc can take that position. It is one of two people wanting to spend their lives together, not a situation where some pretty weird guys want multiple women to screw and share the housework.

Woopee I'm in a straight marriage as well, so is the Iragi muslim down the road from me, however he has two wives, they all appear to get on pretty well, also he's not a weird guy at all, in fact he's a nice helpful bloke.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 47):
And until they don't, then they should recognize gay marriage, but not multipartite marriages.

Still doc I don't think you can support one type of alternative non standard marriage and not recognise that others also want to be in alternative non standard types of marriage. I really don't see any difference between gays getting married and multiple people wanting to get married, neither are 'normal' both are going to upset certain people but I don't see how one can be supported without supporting the other.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7699
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: 'Sister Wives' Family Challenges Utah Bigamy Law

Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:06 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 43):
So the state should comment on what is right or wrong? That's exactly what they are doing when they denied gay marriage. You could easily change the quote to:

"The thing is that "progressive" people that want to live with the same gender (homosexuality) don't care about marriage, that thing of the past"

...so why make gay marriage legal?

THAT is what I found super hypocritical

I live in a country where there is an active fight against cults (for example scientology) and most people are fine with it. I live in a country where married couples do get tax advantages, because it is estimated that marriage leads to kids, and kids are good. Kids also bring tax advantages and "welfare money", no matter if you're married and even if you're a millionaire. We're seeing with Italy and Germany that they don't have kids and those countries will soon be in big trouble (more than half my family is Italian and I've far more cousins in France than Italy).

Personally I don't care about marriage, even if I can accept the way it works here, where religious marriage is not recognized and even illegal if you're not first married by a mayor. However as long as there is such marriage then it should be allowed for 2 men and for 2 women (it will soon be the case here, and I'm pretty sure there won't be that many marriages happening). Our president don't want to marry and that hasn't prevented him to get elected.

Now back to polygamy, it's common here and it's always practiced by Muslims. Not "historical" Muslims from North Africa, but Sub-Saharan Muslims, the same ones that cut the genitals of girls. Also practiced by newly converted Muslims being taught by fundamentalists from Saudi Arabia.

Now, maybe you can show me a polygamist family/community where women aren't treated as inferior relative to men ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aesma and 8 guests