Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

[Cosmo]

Cosmo,

Do you feel better now???

You need a vacation. :lol:

Actually, tibear, I do. Had to be said. Now I can go about enjoying the rest of the people on this forum without knowing you and your ilk were blathering on without my two cents worth. So continue. Just remind me not to let you babysit my dog or my niece ... the way you people think makes me nervous.

SirKevin ... agree -- Good analogy. I was thinking about that too but didn't want to rant on too long. If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

And yes, tibear ... I do need a vacation. But don't try to change the topic.

 

[tibear]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

 

[tibear]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

 

[tibear]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

 

[SirKevin]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

I'm interested in hearing the perspective of others and seeing how they argue against polygamy without using a moral arguement.

Thanks.

Sure. Here's my argument against polygamy, and I don't think it gets into morality at all.

I think that in a polygamous relationship, it becomes a lot easier for the relationship to become abusive, and a lot harder for one of the women to leave if they chose to.

Picture this: A man is married to, say, three women. For the purposes of this example call them Woman A, Woman B and Woman C.

The man becomes abusive towards Woman A. She no longer enjoys the relationship and wants out of it. How can see get out of the relatinship and get a fair share of finances and possessions when she is the only person wanting out? If Women B & C are adamant that their was no abuse or wrongdoing in the relationship towards Woman A [out of their devotion to the husband], how is poor Woman A supposed to get out of the relationship and legally get what she is entitled to? How is the abuse supposed to be prosecuted?

Factor in kids and you have a whole new can of worms.

I'm not saying that all, or even most, polygamous relationships are/would become abusive, but I can see the scenario I outlined playing out enough times to simply cause too many problems for legalized polygamy.

 

[SirKevin]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

I'm interested in hearing the perspective of others and seeing how they argue against polygamy without using a moral arguement.

Thanks.

Sure. Here's my argument against polygamy, and I don't think it gets into morality at all.

I think that in a polygamous relationship, it becomes a lot easier for the relationship to become abusive, and a lot harder for one of the women to leave if they chose to.

Picture this: A man is married to, say, three women. For the purposes of this example call them Woman A, Woman B and Woman C.

The man becomes abusive towards Woman A. She no longer enjoys the relationship and wants out of it. How can see get out of the relatinship and get a fair share of finances and possessions when she is the only person wanting out? If Women B & C are adamant that their was no abuse or wrongdoing in the relationship towards Woman A [out of their devotion to the husband], how is poor Woman A supposed to get out of the relationship and legally get what she is entitled to? How is the abuse supposed to be prosecuted?

Factor in kids and you have a whole new can of worms.

I'm not saying that all, or even most, polygamous relationships are/would become abusive, but I can see the scenario I outlined playing out enough times to simply cause too many problems for legalized polygamy.

 

[SirKevin]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

I'm interested in hearing the perspective of others and seeing how they argue against polygamy without using a moral arguement.

Thanks.

Sure. Here's my argument against polygamy, and I don't think it gets into morality at all.

I think that in a polygamous relationship, it becomes a lot easier for the relationship to become abusive, and a lot harder for one of the women to leave if they chose to.

Picture this: A man is married to, say, three women. For the purposes of this example call them Woman A, Woman B and Woman C.

The man becomes abusive towards Woman A. She no longer enjoys the relationship and wants out of it. How can see get out of the relatinship and get a fair share of finances and possessions when she is the only person wanting out? If Women B & C are adamant that their was no abuse or wrongdoing in the relationship towards Woman A [out of their devotion to the husband], how is poor Woman A supposed to get out of the relationship and legally get what she is entitled to? How is the abuse supposed to be prosecuted?

Factor in kids and you have a whole new can of worms.

I'm not saying that all, or even most, polygamous relationships are/would become abusive, but I can see the scenario I outlined playing out enough times to simply cause too many problems for legalized polygamy.

 

[SirKevin]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

You draw the line where there becomes a high chance of someone's rights being infringed on, where the possibility of a victim is elevated because of what you are trying to legalize, where there becomes a risk to society...a risk to other people...etc. I don't think it's a clear, bold line, I think it can vary case to case.

And I don't think same-sex marriage does any of what I listed.

 

[SirKevin]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

You draw the line where there becomes a high chance of someone's rights being infringed on, where the possibility of a victim is elevated because of what you are trying to legalize, where there becomes a risk to society...a risk to other people...etc. I don't think it's a clear, bold line, I think it can vary case to case.

And I don't think same-sex marriage does any of what I listed.

 

[SirKevin]

Cosmo,

If you're going to draw the line on marriage, who gets to say where that line is drawn? Either it's ok for everyone or no one.

EXACTLY, that's been my point!!!!!!

What would your line be??

You draw the line where there becomes a high chance of someone's rights being infringed on, where the possibility of a victim is elevated because of what you are trying to legalize, where there becomes a risk to society...a risk to other people...etc. I don't think it's a clear, bold line, I think it can vary case to case.

And I don't think same-sex marriage does any of what I listed.

 

[Cosmo]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

tibear ... that's an easy one for me. Consenting adults. Whoever wants to, in whatever formation they choose, including multiples. I also think the age for considering someone a "consenting adult" in terms of being married should be 21. But that's another topic.

The key is consenting ... this implies the people involved are legally capable of making the decision and are doing so without coersion.

To me, it's pretty simple. I mind my own biz. I figure I have enough to do to keep my own life productive and happy without trying to monitor what other grown ups are doing.

My distaste rose from dragging in pedophilia and such other issues. They have nothing at all to do with marriage, yet always seem to come up when the topic is homosexuality. Gets old.

 

[Cosmo]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

tibear ... that's an easy one for me. Consenting adults. Whoever wants to, in whatever formation they choose, including multiples. I also think the age for considering someone a "consenting adult" in terms of being married should be 21. But that's another topic.

The key is consenting ... this implies the people involved are legally capable of making the decision and are doing so without coersion.

To me, it's pretty simple. I mind my own biz. I figure I have enough to do to keep my own life productive and happy without trying to monitor what other grown ups are doing.

My distaste rose from dragging in pedophilia and such other issues. They have nothing at all to do with marriage, yet always seem to come up when the topic is homosexuality. Gets old.

 

[Cosmo]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

tibear ... that's an easy one for me. Consenting adults. Whoever wants to, in whatever formation they choose, including multiples. I also think the age for considering someone a "consenting adult" in terms of being married should be 21. But that's another topic.

The key is consenting ... this implies the people involved are legally capable of making the decision and are doing so without coersion.

To me, it's pretty simple. I mind my own biz. I figure I have enough to do to keep my own life productive and happy without trying to monitor what other grown ups are doing.

My distaste rose from dragging in pedophilia and such other issues. They have nothing at all to do with marriage, yet always seem to come up when the topic is homosexuality. Gets old.

 

[tibear]

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

 

[tibear]

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

 

[tibear]

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

 

[Cosmo]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

What does it matter to me? Doesn't have any bearing on my life. Why would it bother you? I don't get it.

 

[Cosmo]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

What does it matter to me? Doesn't have any bearing on my life. Why would it bother you? I don't get it.

 

[Cosmo]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

What does it matter to me? Doesn't have any bearing on my life. Why would it bother you? I don't get it.

 

[SirKevin]

Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

So your OK with two siblings getting married??

What does it matter to me? Doesn't have any bearing on my life. Why would it bother you? I don't get it.

Well, I'll have to disagree there - if the two siblings had kids, well, aren't kids that come from incest a little bit off?