Romantic and platonic love are entirely different beasts. And to say one is wrong to suggest such a thing is to assume their definition of love is wrong, which is rather ignortant of you.ravensheart18 said:
Polygamy
- Thread starter Draconalis
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I absolutely hate the idea of polygamy. The entire freaking description of it is just... wrong. Form a life long bond between two lovers... With as many lovers as you can.
It just seems to me that the only reason polygamy exists, is so that ****** bigoted old men, can get their funk on with 10,000 women without anyone caring.
Marriage should be between two people. If you want three people in this marriage, then DONT GET MARRIED. Why is it such a chore to avoid wedlock when boning two chicks?
Then there's the men treating women like sheep argument. And why can a man marry as many women as he likes? But women have to stay with one? It's one of the reasons women are hating on men so much to this day! No, absolutely tits. If you want to screw and/or love more than one person, just don't get married. Surely it can't be that hard.
It just seems to me that the only reason polygamy exists, is so that ****** bigoted old men, can get their funk on with 10,000 women without anyone caring.
Marriage should be between two people. If you want three people in this marriage, then DONT GET MARRIED. Why is it such a chore to avoid wedlock when boning two chicks?
Then there's the men treating women like sheep argument. And why can a man marry as many women as he likes? But women have to stay with one? It's one of the reasons women are hating on men so much to this day! No, absolutely tits. If you want to screw and/or love more than one person, just don't get married. Surely it can't be that hard.
Because the origin of marriage wasn't religions... hell, it wasn't even about loving someone and wanting to spend your life with them.kidd25 said:
the concept of marriage pre-dates Christianity, and recorded history as a whole.
Just like Christmas wasn't a religious holiday to begin with, marriage wasn't a religious union.
So what you're saying is that there are no non-religious people who marry for romantic reasons?Draconalis said:
You could say that another reason is that society views at as cheating on one or all of the several people you could be "going out" with. Just a thought and i have never encountered Polygamy in my life so far. But i can see one of my mates going for it... i really must buy a pair of nut crackers.
A lot of legal issues would be cleared up if they just banned marriage altogether. Do you really need a piece of paper to love each other/others? Write a will and the heirs problem disappears...drop the tax breaks. I don't want to pay people to shag each other and have kids, i want to pay for my country to be a better place for everyone, not just breeders
I'm fine with people having multiple partners as long as they don't try it on with mine.
I'm fine with people having multiple partners as long as they don't try it on with mine.
Thank god we're not Denobulans. Each denobulan has 3 spouses of the other gender.
Star Trek anyone? No?
Op - I just don't believe in it personally. I believe in soul mates. Call me old fashioned or romantic. Part of me thinks it would be fun to have another girl to mess around with, but the thought of seeing my boyfriend kissing and touching her... oh hell no.
Star Trek anyone? No?
Op - I just don't believe in it personally. I believe in soul mates. Call me old fashioned or romantic. Part of me thinks it would be fun to have another girl to mess around with, but the thought of seeing my boyfriend kissing and touching her... oh hell no.
It made me chuckle when I read that as "Call me old fashioned. I wouldn't mind playing with another girl, but my boyfriend can't have none"Catie Caraco said:
I caught the Star Trek reference, by the way.
I think it's great.
And here's how I personally look on it with my life. If I loved a woman, I would personally never want it to be unrequited under any conditions. And I would rather share that woman with someone else rather than not have her at all. Just because she might like someone other than me doesn't mean that they don't still love me. Heck, she could just want to have sex with another man and that doesn't mean she doesn't love me or still want to have sex with me. People are naturally sexually attracted to lots of people. And again having that attraction or desire or even going through with it doesn't mean that they wouldn't love me or be attracted to me anymore. So long as they're tolerable people and not jerks, it's not a big deal. I don't want to share a person with a bunch of jerks. But if they're nice guys or girls or whatever, it's no big deal.
There are a bunch of people out there who would say silly things like "she's playing you, you're just a toy, you're pathetic", but I think they're stupid and their opinion doesn't matter. And that's why I would be in a relationship with a woman I loved, instead of people like them. They don't know what's right and what's best, and they don't know what's best for me and people I care about. It's more abusive to be told that you're a friend and you know what's best for someone, and that they need to get out of that situation, than to share someone you love. They don't know what your love is, they're not in your position. And they're by default less important and less dear to you.
So yeah, there's no reason to stop loving who you love. Even if one person in the picture loves more than one person.
And here's how I personally look on it with my life. If I loved a woman, I would personally never want it to be unrequited under any conditions. And I would rather share that woman with someone else rather than not have her at all. Just because she might like someone other than me doesn't mean that they don't still love me. Heck, she could just want to have sex with another man and that doesn't mean she doesn't love me or still want to have sex with me. People are naturally sexually attracted to lots of people. And again having that attraction or desire or even going through with it doesn't mean that they wouldn't love me or be attracted to me anymore. So long as they're tolerable people and not jerks, it's not a big deal. I don't want to share a person with a bunch of jerks. But if they're nice guys or girls or whatever, it's no big deal.
There are a bunch of people out there who would say silly things like "she's playing you, you're just a toy, you're pathetic", but I think they're stupid and their opinion doesn't matter. And that's why I would be in a relationship with a woman I loved, instead of people like them. They don't know what's right and what's best, and they don't know what's best for me and people I care about. It's more abusive to be told that you're a friend and you know what's best for someone, and that they need to get out of that situation, than to share someone you love. They don't know what your love is, they're not in your position. And they're by default less important and less dear to you.
So yeah, there's no reason to stop loving who you love. Even if one person in the picture loves more than one person.
*Boards up my House*Hitokiri_Gensai said:I believe its mostly for law purposes, as in, who is legally married to who and all that crap.
Personally, i have two slave girls, and a girlfriend, and im always looking for another slave so, im a polygamist
I SERVE NO MAN OR WOMAN!!!
You won't be getting your hands on this piece of meat anytime soon Madam!
Daystar Clarion said:
I couldn't do it because I'm one of those jealous types. Not by an extreme level, but to share a spouse or divide attention from one seems just like a huge NO to me.
I kinda live that old Kerouac Romance, "There's that special someone out there for me and only me."
....Suddenly my manic depression shot back up like Mt. Krakatoa after reading that.LilithSlave said:
Honestly, some people may be ok with that sort of lifestyle, but to me it sort of makes me feel like #2 again or brings back memories of my last relationship.
"Yeah I care for you. Just not as much as you do for me. So don't go looking at other girls while I don't show you affection."
Me:..."I'm ending this "
Surprised she didn't cheat on my ass. But idk. Jealously is something that spreads faster than a rumor over the internet.
I want to give you the manliest and most scientific hug possible...*Tears well up in my eyes*Draconalis said:
Hmm Pardon my intrusion sir, but is it you or Draconalis that is Pro-Polygamy?Housebroken Lunatic said:
You've proven to bring up valid points and I might have misread a bit.
It started with our original religious laws, and never got changed. Since the most prominent examples of it are when it's used to abuse women and children, it's not exactly a cause most people want to rally behind.
A "triple" romantic relationship is called a "triad" - I live in one, and have for over a decade. We own property together, share a bank account, and care for each other when we fall ill. With us, it happens to be me (bisexual male), my wife (bisexual female), and my male partner (gay male) - my wife and my partner love each other in a very platonic way.Draconalis said:
It is illegal in America primarily, like many "moral laws", for religious reasons. In the Netherlands:
Meanwhile in the Netherlands polygamy has been legalised in all but name. Last Friday the first civil union of three partners was registered. Victor de Bruijn (46) from Roosendaal ?married? both Bianca (31) and Mirjam (35) in a ceremony before a notary who duly registered their civil union.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/301
...it appears quite legal.
We haven't ever had the cops come in and bust us for living together; when we bought a house, all three of our names were on the property deed. You can add as many names as you want to a bank account, etc. It's tricky, but you can live as a triad (or quad, or whatever) - you just can't have a legal marriage; so you need a good lawyer if you, say, want to leave your property to multiple people when you die.
It also sucks in the US because we're not all eligible to be on one another's health insurance plans; but US health insurance sucks in general. It's employer based for the most part, which means if you lose your job you're already in a position of having to rely on the emergency room for all medical care; and they won't treat everything at the ER until it's in the final, life threatening stages. In other words, the emergency room won't give you free blood pressure medication in the US but they WILL try to save your life if you're having a heart attack on the floor.
But back to your general question, why is it illegal? Money and religion, and the desire to control and have power over others - same reasons as most laws.
I believe it is a chaotic system that is hard to manage, not impossible, but far from the simplest option.
On the other hand, if all parties are aware and in support of it and believe they can make it work, then they should go for it.
On the other hand, if all parties are aware and in support of it and believe they can make it work, then they should go for it.
