We do not know if monogamy or polygamy was the norm for early man. It is entirely possible that a society practicing monogamy might have some advantage over one that practices polygamy.
Yeah. Early man is a mystery sometimes as sometimes there is not enough evidence for us to deduce customs, personal habits, local and regional traits, etc. But, there are studies that have been done and presumably still being done that suggest some humans are prone to monogamy and some not. It makes sense to me because some people like different music than others, different sports, colors, etc., too, so why not issues concerning sex and gender?
Actually polygamy is practiced most widely in traditional Muslim cultures. I suppose that might go a long way to explaining why so many young Muslim men are willing to blow themselves up.
Quite. I think the root of that is the dedication to the religions they have.
Consenting adults should be free to set up social contracts, marriages, or family units, call them whatever you want, as they see fit.
A society that grants that freedom may end up with some polygamy, some polyandry, some monogamy, some gay marriages, some sexless partnerships... but it will likely end up with balance. In a truly free society polygamy wouldn't be something to fear, because it would be balanced by other arrangements.
Certainly!
The sooner humans dump their prescribed prejudices, especially concerning other people's lives, the better lives we can all have. It won't be perfect, because things always are changing, but it'll make for a lot better relationships between people and groups of people. The speedbumps on that road that I see are people's takes on their religions, capitalism/consumerism, politics, and attitudes.
We share the same viewpoint here. What goes on between consenting adults should only concern the consenting adults involved.
I can see some people's lives becoming very complicated, but that would be their choice.
lmao The Peter Principle.
Laws regarding divorce, child custody, survivor benefits... will have to change to accomodate the new personal freedoms.
Definitely.
And that right there is most likely the real reason why certain relationships are either illegal or not recognized by the government.... it'd be too much work for them to organize the laws to suit, so they'll just try and find a way to make a certain relationship unjustified so they don't have to bother.
Yeah, they can't grasp the concept of keeping things simple. The simpler it is, the easier it is to handle.
Its up to parents to raise their children and define what is moral or normal. The other issues fall into the category of child abuse and we already have laws for this. The key words here are "consenting adults". Marriage doesn't legalize statutory rape, whether the child is the first, second or more spouse.
Often people who are against allowing other consenting adults the freedom to make personal choices, try to confuse the issue with child abuse which is another issue.
Yup. But what can we foresee? Which actions can have an abusive effect on a child and when? Perhaps something we do now will have an effect show up in a kid a couple decades from now. I think people get caught up in that thought and overreact which causes the tendency to nanny everything and everyone around them. Some of that nannying is ok, but other parts can be fairly harmful. After a few years we decided that our kids were pretty bright, adaptive, and resilient so we pretty much gave them free rein and interfered infrequently when their activities encroached on someone else's freedoms or when it seemed they might be injured or something. And as it turned out there is very little that can shock them and they are quite happy helping people at whatever people want help with.
Laws evolve as society evolves. Laws should not hinder personal freedoms. Our personal freedoms which include freedom of choice are guaranteed under Canada's charter.
Generally, I agree.
