I can't image anything more awful than polygamy.

I would think there would be problems about legal status, as far as insurance and so forth.

I guess you could insure all your children, regardless of who the mother is....or could you?

If you had 3 wives that were staying home with children, you could only claim 1 as your wife or your significant other.

If one of the wives who was not first wife had to do something legally that showed she was married to a man, she'd be out of luck.

Also, from what I got from the "Big Love" show, it was not just about living and loving together. To these people, it was very important to each other that each of them knew in their hearts that there was an actual marriage between them, according to their religion, and not just "we live together so essentially it's like we're married"

I suppose it would be the same principle as saying that it is very important to an individual to remain a virgin until marriage, and not just to have a civil ceremony, but a ceremony that is sanctioned by the religion you belong to...and if you couldn't do that, you couldn't be married.

Again, just going by the way it seemed it "should" be for this fictitious morman polygamous family....At one point, a friend, business partner and fellow polygamous person told Bill that he had decided to marry again, and in fact had been "dating" another woman, and was ready now to bring her to his home to get the approval of his other wives. From where he stood, he had only casually dated this other woman, with the intent of feeling her out about the chances of her wanting this lifestyle. He wouldn't seriously date her until his wives agreed she was a good fit. In fact, they rejected her, saying they felt she was going into this thing without the proper attitude of what this meant as a family and in the eyes of God.

So no, I would say, regardless of the culture, true polygamy is not looked at as simply living together and having children. It is a true marriage in every sense of the world. For instance, all of Bill's wives were virgins when they married, so there was no casual sex involved.

chai wrote :



since most of these "wifes to be" are often very young and live in fairly strictly controlled families/environments , one might expect them to be virgins .
officially the catholic church "assumes" couples to enter marriage as "chaste" even today i understand , but reality seems to look somewhat different these days , does it not ?

for me it's rather theoretical anyhow since i don't know any of those mormons .
we did spend four weeks cruising with a mormon bishop and his wife(they wre both chemical scientists working for a large chemical corporation - i understand being "bishop" was a part-time sideline) from rome to miami some years ago and they were quite an interesting couple - very good dinner companions , but no liquor or even coffee entered their mouths - not even herbal tea , just water i recall ! .
hbg

I guess I'm not saying it right.

I don't see a problem with anyone having as many wives or husbands as they like, legally and with everyone of age, and whatever gender they prefer.

As far as I know, the only connection to the claim that you can only have one or that men should be allowed multiples, seems to always be religion. Take religion out of the mix and just let everyone marry who they want, work it out among their family and go about their business.

The only restrictions should be age and not marrying for purposes of giving people citizenship or anything else illegal.

Agreed!

Convicted bigamist jailed again in Georgia
Man says he has divorced some of 8 wives, but can't remember which ones
MSNBC.com

ATLANTA - A traveling minister who served two years in prison on bigamy charges has been jailed again after at least four women said he proposed to them.

Officials also say there is no evidence that Bishop Anthony Owens, 35, divorced the eight wives he had married before going to prison.

A judge will decide whether Owens should go back to prison. Owens, who turned himself into the Gwinnett County jail April 30, declined to be interviewed.

Lol!!!


"No hard feelings".


Therein, I think, lies the rub (as Chai pointed out in an earlier post).


I think these lovely open relationships generally fall apart somewhere due to hard feelings. I suspect it is very hard not to have them.


And, heck, ONE relationship is a hell of a lot of work.


I don't think I'd have the energy any more even for two.


But...I'd only have a problem with however people choose to arrange their love lives if it involves deception or non validly and fully consenting adults.

I have a yuk gut reaction, though, to cultures (and they seem to be the non monogamy norm) where only men have a choice of multiple partners under the law, or the religious fiats du jour. Sauce for gander ought to be sauce for goose as far as I am concerned.

sqinney wrote ;



why not simply have people enter into a legal contract with one another and forget about the whole marriage deal - weddings that now seem to cost $20,000 and more(our house cost less than that ) - isn't that just ridiculous .
have a legal contract that sets out rights and responsibilities - and that's it .

i suppose anyone could do that even now , couldn't they ?
hbg
hbg

Good idea!

Neither hamburger nor Thomas is on my list, I must admit.

We are such an odd culture. If it came on the news that a group of 45 -60 year old women were selecting young men in their freshmen year of high school to become permanent members of a household where one woman held sway over as many as four males ranging in age from 29 to 14, what do you think would be the reaction?

Suppose, when asked, the members of that community simply replied that their religion not only allowed such unions but insisted on it. Why is it that we would be expected to give any weight to such a claim?

Joe("oh, right then. Word of God. scripture. okay. Nevermind")Nation

Joe(perspectiveisall)Nation.

walter wrote :



"nun danket alle gott ! " = "thank god for small mercies ! "
hbg

I personally would be insulted.

I would turn him down, but I'd still not like being left off of a list.

Joe(wait a minute. I wasn't on the list!!!)Nation

And this is exactly the million dollar point... There is no reason to believe this man is religiously or ethnically a polygamist, but a river rat womanizer "traveling minister" who's either too lazy or too inpoverished to get the papers signed. But his is not the ethnicity in question (and neither is Romney's.)

Worse, culturally, is that if Mr. Traveling Minister this man has sex with 8 chicks, he's called "normal," just as long as they mean dirt to him. But if he buys them each a house, or pays the bills for more than one matronage of children, he's a monster and goes to prison. That's where the law breaks down. I agree with the above posters that child molestation is the crime when we say "polygamy," and 8 consenting adults should be able to do anything they want. Still, multiple marriages is a crime in every state.

P.S. Mormons drink herbal tea, and everything else except alcohol and coffee; and that's irrelevant since the Mormons you're referring to (the LDS ones) aren't the "mormons" of Big Love and Warren Jeffs and whatever (whose great great great grandpappies were LDS, but with no contact since.)