Jump to content
Can't remember your login details? Read more... ×
kikz

Why is there not a fuss about polygamous marriage?

Recommended Posts

...if you wanna know why its illegal,have a read of this link theres plenty of articulated arguments by plenty of qualified people.

actually, ive yet to express an interest in why it is illegal, but thanks for the link!

 

with any luck, these 'qualified people' will articulate arguments that go beyond "i went to a country with hajis in it once — therefore, polygamy is bad mkay".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most countries being married to more than one person is illegal, usually because of the tax incentives that marriage brings. I'm not advocating for multiple marriages to be legal in Australia, and like I said, neither are most of the polyamorous people I know. There are, as always, people who are passionate about the idea. Here's an amusing look at part of what I think about marriage equality though: http://qntm.org/gay

Not written by my, just someone very much like me :) In the end, I don't think that the state should have a say in who I can marry, or place limits on it, but I realise I'm in a rather small minority and that it doesn't really matter!

 

In all current regions that allow polygamy (Multiple marriages) it's actually polygyny (One husband, many wives) that's legal and the laws reduce the human rights of women, ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy

 

In Australia, according to legal advice I've received (This is what I was told, don't rely on it in court, pay for your own legal advice and don't blame me if it's wrong), a relationship outside of a marriage is considered a de facto relationship if it persists for more than 2 years, which impacts the settlement decisions if your spouse files for divorce and the court needs to decide on the settlement, but it's not illegal.

 

To be clear, there's a difference between being married to, and sharing a relationship with a person.

 

Life is complicated, whether you have multiple loving relationships or not, and, as I've previously mentioned here, I love complexity and complicated things, polyharmonic classical music to Baroque-core, quantum mechanics, and the complex line between monotonic and chaotic automota :) And I'm reasonably adept at managing my time and energy after some years of practice.

 

 

I'm also curious, How do you define what constitutes a relationship and what constitutes just friends? Do your multiple partners interact with each other or are you the lynch-pin holding it all together?

Well, we define it as a relationship when everyone agrees it's a relationship and wants things to continue down that path. Yes this is a fuzzy line, but tends to be along the lines of partners snog, friends don't. Partners of mine have in the past shared relationships together, but that's certainly not required. Things get bad when partners don't like each other so I try to avoid that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also curious, How do you define what constitutes a relationship and what constitutes just friends? Do your multiple partners interact with each other or are you the lynch-pin holding it all together?

Well, we define it as a relationship when everyone agrees it's a relationship and wants things to continue down that path. Yes this is a fuzzy line, but tends to be along the lines of partners snog, friends don't. Partners of mine have in the past shared relationships together, but that's certainly not required. Things get bad when partners don't like each other so I try to avoid that.

 

Yeah that makes it very hard to draw boundaries and when the line is that fuzzy it makes it impossible to officially define things.

 

I'm in an open relationship and have no issues kissing other people, me and my partner both have strong views that if either of us tried to turn things into a polygamous relationship then it would be all over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait for the first Polyamorous divorce.

 

The legal shit-fight that will go on over which partner takes what, is the best argument against legislating for this "right".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait for the first Polyamorous divorce.

 

The legal shit-fight that will go on over which partner takes what, is the best argument against legislating for this "right".

A lawyer's wet dream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do butt plugs get the same sentimental value in custody battles as pets or kids?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait for the first Polyamorous divorce.

 

The legal shit-fight that will go on over which partner takes what, is the best argument against legislating for this "right".

Yeah, I guess there's no precedent in resolving the dissolution of multi-party contracts in other areas - say, business. That'll be a tough kettle of fish for them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wait for the first Polyamorous divorce.

 

The legal shit-fight that will go on over which partner takes what, is the best argument against legislating for this "right".

Yeah, I guess there's no precedent in resolving the dissolution of multi-party contracts in other areas - say, business. That'll be a tough kettle of fish for them!

Pity marriage has no contract. And involves things like kids, pets, the necessities of life, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wait for the first Polyamorous divorce.

 

The legal shit-fight that will go on over which partner takes what, is the best argument against legislating for this "right".

Yeah, I guess there's no precedent in resolving the dissolution of multi-party contracts in other areas - say, business. That'll be a tough kettle of fish for them!

Pity marriage has no contract. And involves things like kids, pets, the necessities of life, etc.

 

 

Worst case I guess, they fall back to the old "Split everything 3 ways" with the exceptions for "Can prove total ownership" of individual assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah except what do you do if partner 3 hates partner 2 and wants to divorce 2 but not 1?

 

And 1 wants to remain to both.

 

How the fuck does that work?

 

This isn't gay marriage which is basically just a removal of gender from legislation - this is a whole new beast.

 

Just keep scaling it up. How do we work the family tax benefits for a 17-person marriage?

 

In fact, the only way poly marriage works is if you kill off gay marriage, restrict women's rights and allow men to multi-marry.

 

While you're at it, may I suggest a name change from Commonwealth of Australia to "Saudi Australia"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big part of the reasoning behind it all is rorting the welfare system.

Get a critical mass of partners and kids, put up with a little bit of overcrowding, but otherwise live a fairly comfortable life for free courtesy of the taxpayer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×