| Author |
Topic:
Polygamy
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
9/21/07 2:09pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
I had intended to put a  after that sentence, but typed it up in Word and forgot to when I pasted it.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
PrincessChattyCathy
Title: JCC Mod of Pinkness
Registered:
Dec '05
|
Date Posted:
9/23/07 3:48pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
I don't have any of the usual links and evidence typically required in the senate but I hope my comments will be allowed to stand anyway.
Yes there are currently groups of people practicing polygamy in the United States, because this practice is illegal it is necessary to hide ones behavior to avoid getting caught. I believe that when you are having to hide from the law then individuals that also desire to hide from the law will be attracted to these groups of people. Also the communities have to hide their practices so therefore they do not have trust in law enforcement when there are problems so things go on in secret and unreported. I believe that for the most part these things would go away if polygamy was made legal. There are also many groups that do not have these illegal influences going on. The more sensational stories just get more attention.
My husband was raised in a home where his mother had two husbands at the same time. One of the main reasons for doing this was to provide financial and emotional stability to the home. He often talks about how great it was to have the attention of three adults. Is this lifestyle for everyone? Absolutely not but for some perhaps it would provide for their needs.
-----signature-----
Tiger's mom, Lemminglord's  BSU Broncos 2007 Fiesta Bowl Champions in one of the most amazing games ever A piece of my heart is in Richmond, VA Souderwan is my hero Ban No Ban Game 10 VIP
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Vagrant
Registered:
Apr '02
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 1:54am
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
|
As a polyamorous atheist, I'd like to see more focus on why the act of loving more than one person at the time should be considered morally wrong, and less talk about Mormonism.
-----signature-----
"Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory." -John Marburger, Science adviser for president Bush Join the Emperor's Hammer! http://www.ehtiecorps.org/join.asp
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 2:13am
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
|
As would I.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jedi_Keiran_Halcyon
Registered:
Dec '00
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 3:03am
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
Vagrant posted:
As a polyamorous atheist, I'd like to see more focus on why the act of loving more than one person at the time should be considered morally wrong, and less talk about Mormonism.
My only concerns would pertain to child-raising, and which parent would ultimately have authority. Say you have a family with two fathers, two mothers, and four children (one from each possible pairing of parents). How does that work? Parenting by committee?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ShaneP
Registered:
Mar '01
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 12:41pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
My only concerns would pertain to child-raising, and which parent would ultimately have authority
I've observed polygamists up close and there seems to be a heirarchy set up for specific issues.
Personally, I have no problem with consenting adults entering into these type of arrangements.
-----signature-----
It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
darth_paul
Registered:
Apr '00
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 12:47pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
Jedi_Keiran_Halcyon posted:
My only concerns would pertain to child-raising, and which parent would ultimately have authority. Say you have a family with two fathers, two mothers, and four children (one from each possible pairing of parents). How does that work? Parenting by committee?
Honestly, that sounds to me as though it would probably be very healthy, because you have even less of the imposition of a single perspective on how a child is raised and more of a consensus. But this is how any good parenting setup should work anyway, albeit usually with fewer people involved. I would consider a two-parent situation where one parent has authority, or is the last word, or however you want to put it to be deeply unhealthy. Even in a two-parent household, decisions should be made by consensus, and not settled until there can be some level of agreement. For one parent to get the real, final say would be basically wrong, and set a bad example for the child's future relationships.
-Paul
-----signature-----
So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 12:47pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
I read an article about this a while back, but I forgot where it was. One point it brought up is the fact that if you have multiple parents like that, then a child doesn't know which one is his real father. Also I think a huge issue is that jealousy is a very basic emotion and these sorts of relationships would seem more prone to become destabilized due to it.
Also I would be interested in seeing if any anthropological studies have found any groups of people where polyamorous relationships lasted in a society for a long period of time.
Also it is hard enough for two people to stay together in this day and age, I would think the number of "divorces" would increase exponentially. I just can't imagine a group of all six people staying together in a cohesive family unit for very long time periods. It seems like you might just be turning into some kind of extended family. Also, what about children who have two different biological parents but are "siblings?" It seems to me that whenever you have situations like that the likelihood of incest or abuse increases. And there seems to be nothing stopping a child of two people from then as an adult becoming part of the marriage by hooking up with some of the other parents.
I am not saying that all such groups will have these problems, some of them might be very uncommon, but the implications of breaking away from monogamy aren't fully understood.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
darth_paul
Registered:
Apr '00
|
Date Posted:
9/28/07 3:49pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
Espaldapalabras posted:
One point it brought up is the fact that if you have multiple parents like that, then a child doesn't know which one is his real father.
On the other hand, does that necessarily matter? If the issue is pressing enough for all concerned, simple testing will answer the question, but I don't think there's anything so fundamentally important about biological paternity that it has to be a big deal; it's important because we make it important, and maybe if we were more open to more forms of relationships, "Who's the father" would become less of a big deal.
It seems likely to me that our interest in paternity is in fact very much tied up in a system that is essentially either monogamous or patrilineal. While they would likely add their own complications to the question, polygamous marriages might well begin to push away from treating biological relationship as the default determining factor for inheritance and the like. Put in another way, if a group of people are all having sex with each other with the knowledge and consent of all concerned, and if, whatever the provisions made for the disposition and division of their property and the like, it was not based upon biological relatedness, most of the issues that have made determination of paternity of particular importance would disappear. We'd be left mainly with social pressures on the child, which aren't necessarily something that needs to last forever.
-Paul
-----signature-----
So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Septhaka
Registered:
Nov '06
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 12:26pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
- Date Edited:
9/29/07 12:36pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Septhaka
|
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
Septhaka posted:
Excellent. Please elaborate on how gay partnerships in the United States are associated with these crimes with more frequency than heterosexual partnerships. Make that connection and then we can discuss my credibility. If you can't make that connection then we can discuss yours.
Just using a few quick Google searches can do that:
Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays'
Links between homosexuality and incest
Unwanted Sexual Experiences and Sexual Risks in Gay and Bisexual Men: Associations Among Revictimization, Substance Use, and Psychiatric Symptoms - Statistical Data Included
That covers three of the social ills that you referenced (sex with minors, incest, and coercion).
I have not evaluated the analysis performed in reaching the conclusions above. And I'm willing to wager you have not either. However, they have no bearing on the question of gay marriage. The articles don't say "married gays are more inclined to do this or that" but rather gays. We can stratify the population in all sorts of ways. I suspect people below the poverty line are more inclined to steal. Going to prevent poor people from marrying? I suspect men are more inclined to commit sex with minors. Going to prevent men from marrying? The absurdities pile up very quick when you can discard things such as reason and objectivity.
Kimball Kinnison posted:
Agree with those sources or not, where is your proof that polygamy is the cause of these problems?
Its amusing I'm educating a Mormon on the causation between polygamy and the social ills I listed above.
Incest - As we have seen from the accounts of the FLDS, incestuous relationships are caused by the polygamous tendency of marriage among close family members. Just a little bit of objectivity can do wonders. Incest is a fixture of the institution not vice versa. If you can offer up a more compelling cause then we're all ears.
Sex with minors - As we have also seen from the accounts of the FLDS and other polygamous societies, marriages are arranged between girls as young as 13 and their husbands-to-be. Again, if you have a better explanation then lets hear it.
Coercion - The coercion in the Jeffs trial is clear and the indications are its rampant within such societies.
The fine point of it is polygamy only thrives in the United States under the ruse of religious belief. Thus, the polygamy we see is a particularly insidious form of polygamy that ultimately inflicts a heavy burden on the United States. I, for one, do not want to be burdened with the welfare and other social costs of the numerous wives and dependents of barbaric men that are just trying to bed as many women as possible and do it under the ruse of religious justification.
Its of no moment that in particular situations polygamy might be practiced in such a way as to not create such a burden on society. We are a society that imposes a requirement of equal rights. To deny a right to one class, the right must be denied to all. While a rich man could technically marry 10 women and support them and do so without committing any of the crimes above - the point of it is the government has determine the practice - on an aggregate basis - can not be sustained in such a manner.
-----signature-----
Leaving these boards effective 9/30/07
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 12:45pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
All of your examples are a very clear logical fallacy. You are wrongly claiming that because there are examples of these social ills connected to polygamous relationships, that they are caused by those polygamous relationships.
Septhaka posted:
Incest - As we have seen from the accounts of the FLDS, incestuous relationships are caused by the polygamous tendency of marriage among close family members. Just a little bit of objectivity can do wonders. Incest is a fixture of the institution not vice versa. If you can offer up a more compelling cause then we're all ears.
The FLDS accounts do not demonstrate a causal relationship between polygamy and incest. All they show is correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Sex with minors - As we have also seen from the accounts of the FLDS and other polygamous societies, marriages are arranged between girls as young as 13 and their husbands-to-be. Again, if you have a better explanation then lets hear it.
I'm not the one claiming a causal relationship. You are. That lays the burden of proof on you, not on me. You have only shown correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Coercion - The coercion in the Jeffs trial is clear and the indications are its rampant within such societies.
Once more, that only shoes correlation, not causation.
Now, why don't you go back and hide under your bridge until you've actually got proof that isn't riddled with fallacies?
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lowbacca_1977
Title: Senate Moderator
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 1:06pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
|
The correlation here isn't polygamy and those problems, I think its the correlation between a specific group, Warren Jeffs and followers, and those problems.
Septhaka posted:
Thus, the polygamy we see is a particularly insidious form of polygamy that ultimately inflicts a heavy burden on the United States. I, for one, do not want to be burdened with the welfare and other social costs of the numerous wives and dependents of barbaric men that are just trying to bed as many women as possible and do it under the ruse of religious justification.
By that logic, we SHOULD put laws against poor people too.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Septhaka
Registered:
Nov '06
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 1:24pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
- Date Edited:
3/21 6:24pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
LemmingLord
|
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
All of your examples are a very clear logical fallacy. You are wrongly claiming that because there are examples of these social ills connected to polygamous relationships, that they are caused by those polygamous relationships.
Septhaka posted:
Incest - As we have seen from the accounts of the FLDS, incestuous relationships are caused by the polygamous tendency of marriage among close family members. Just a little bit of objectivity can do wonders. Incest is a fixture of the institution not vice versa. If you can offer up a more compelling cause then we're all ears.
The FLDS accounts do not demonstrate a causal relationship between polygamy and incest. All they show is correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Sex with minors - As we have also seen from the accounts of the FLDS and other polygamous societies, marriages are arranged between girls as young as 13 and their husbands-to-be. Again, if you have a better explanation then lets hear it.
I'm not the one claiming a causal relationship. You are. That lays the burden of proof on you, not on me. You have only shown correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Coercion - The coercion in the Jeffs trial is clear and the indications are its rampant within such societies.
Once more, that only shoes correlation, not causation.
Now, why don't you go back and hide under your bridge until you've actually got proof that isn't riddled with fallacies?
First, you have proposed a strawman to tear it down. I am not stating correlation means causation. Thus, your hyperbole about logical fallacy is misplaced.
The FLDS examples clearly show causation. The polygamous practices of FLDS clearly result in the crimes I have described. Why? The polygamous practices of FLDS are the precise crimes themselves!
-----signature-----
Leaving these boards effective 9/30/07
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Septhaka
Registered:
Nov '06
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 1:25pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
- Date Edited:
3/21 6:57pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
LemmingLord
|
Lowbacca_1977 posted:
The correlation here isn't polygamy and those problems, I think its the correlation between a specific group, Warren Jeffs and followers, and those problems.
Septhaka posted:
Thus, the polygamy we see is a particularly insidious form of polygamy that ultimately inflicts a heavy burden on the United States. I, for one, do not want to be burdened with the welfare and other social costs of the numerous wives and dependents of barbaric men that are just trying to bed as many women as possible and do it under the ruse of religious justification.
By that logic, we SHOULD put laws against poor people too.
No one is claiming correlation.
-----signature-----
Leaving these boards effective 9/30/07
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
9/29/07 2:07pm
Subject:
RE: Polygamy
- Date Edited:
9/29/07 2:10pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Espaldapalabras
|
Septhaka posted:
Its amusing I'm educating a Mormon on the causation between polygamy and the social ills I listed above.
Septhaka posted:
I am not stating correlation means causation.
Septhaka posted:
No one is claiming correlation
Let's just review the facts of what you posted. You gave examples of people within the FLDS community who also engaged in criminal behavior. This is what we call a "correlation."( mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc.)
I started to go through every point to show why you only showed a correlation, but then I looked at KK's post and realized he already did it.
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
All of your examples are a very clear logical fallacy. You are wrongly claiming that because there are examples of these social ills connected to polygamous relationships, that they are caused by those polygamous relationships.
Septhaka posted:
Incest - As we have seen from the accounts of the FLDS, incestuous relationships are caused by the polygamous tendency of marriage among close family members. Just a little bit of objectivity can do wonders. Incest is a fixture of the institution not vice versa. If you can offer up a more compelling cause then we're all ears.
The FLDS accounts do not demonstrate a causal relationship between polygamy and incest. All they show is correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Sex with minors - As we have also seen from the accounts of the FLDS and other polygamous societies, marriages are arranged between girls as young as 13 and their husbands-to-be. Again, if you have a better explanation then lets hear it.
I'm not the one claiming a causal relationship. You are. That lays the burden of proof on you, not on me. You have only shown correlation.
Septhaka posted:
Coercion - The coercion in the Jeffs trial is clear and the indications are its rampant within such societies.
Once more, that only shoes correlation, not causation.
Now, why don't you go back and hide under your bridge until you've actually got proof that isn't riddled with fallacies?
Kimball Kinnison
The fine point of it is polygamy only thrives in the United States under the ruse of religious belief.
Categorically false. I'm not going to call you a liar, but I will simply direct your attention to the post we were discussing before you directly contradicted it:
Vagrant posted:
As a polyamorous atheist, I'd like to see more focus on why the act of loving more than one person at the time should be considered morally wrong, and less talk about Mormonism.
If you could get off your anti-Mormon warhorse to actually read posts, perhaps we could have an actual discussion about polygamy.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
