ATAR Notes: Forum
General Discussion => General Discussion Boards => News and Politics => Topic started by: Bohr on July 07, 2010, 01:18:45 am
-
If homosexuality was to be allowed, shouldn't we allow polygamy and polyandry as well?
Grant the public their rights!
-
Exactly! :D great thought Bohr....
-
yeah sure why not
-
So whats stopping a man from having wives and husbands? or vice versa.
-
If homosexuality was to be allowed
Pretty sure its already allowed, gay marriage is not legal...currently.
-
As long as it's completely consensual, I don't really care.
I wonder how many people would identify themselves as polygamous though? I mean, I know that we aren't necessarily biologically monogamous, but monogamy is so socially pervasive that it's the norm.
-
it's legal in Utah
-
it's legal in Utah
No it's not. Polygamy is a crime in every U.S. state.
-
it's legal in Utah
No it's not. Polygamy is a crime in every U.S. state.
just checked you're right. I just assumed cause of this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Love and thought I had read it somewhere else
-
I wonder how many people would identify themselves as polygamous though? I mean, I know that we aren't necessarily biologically monogamous, but monogamy is so socially pervasive that it's the norm.
I've met quite a few people in the last year or so who are polygamous (or rather, polyamorous, I don't know the exact difference). I was surprised at just how prevalent it is. As you say, monogamy is socially pervasive and "accepted", so a lot of polygamists I'm guessing wouldn't go around broadcasting the fact.
-
So whats stopping a man from having wives and husbands? or vice versa.
The law.
-
Why not take this to it's logical extreme and allow incest?
-
Why not take this to it's logical extreme and allow incest?
Wayyyyyyy different.
Incest has been proven to have a high chance to mess up resulting chidren. Even ignoring the moral issues, and the fact that in such cases and relationships, it is HIGHLY unlikely to be completely concensual, the chance of harm is too great, especially to outweigh the miniscule amount of ppl that will benifit from this and have a 'normal baby'.
Don't really see how the logic is the same for allowing incest and allowing polygamy........
-
Hey my horse died last year...can I still marry him?
-
Einstein married his cousin.
-
Hey my horse died last year...can I still marry him?
LOL, no, only because necrophillia isn't allowed :P
-
Homosexuality is about two people of the same gender loving each other - Nothing wrong with that.
Polygamy is about a man who is a bit of a pimp - According to this thread, there's nothing wrong with that.
Necrophillia is about someone in love with a corpse - Nothing morally wrong about that? Necrophillia isn't rape, it's recycling
Beastiality is about someone who really loves his/her pet - ...Why isn't that allowed?
-
now wats ur take on incest :P
-
Only reason why incest is illegal is because the kids end up retarded.
-
Many Muslims marry cousins, i don't see the Australian government stopping that.
-
Are the Muslims Austrlalian citizens that got married in Australia??
Because I can see the Australian government stopping that.
-
Hey my horse died last year...can I still marry him?
All of the other examples in this thread are about consenting adults so...
no
-
except for the incest bit
-
Yep, I've met some. Some even marry their cousins overseas and bring them here. How will the government know if they are cousins? What if two cousins had a kid without being married? What if a person doesn't know who his father is and ends up marrying his own sibling?
I'm starting to agree with Yitzi's view on fixed morality in the 'Gillard is an atheist' post.
-
Polygamy is about a man who is a bit of a pimp - According to this thread, there's nothing wrong with that.
It works the other way around too. Woman with many husbands also = polygamy.
Beastiality is about someone who really loves his/her pet - ...Why isn't that allowed?
Yeah good point! Pets can give consent. And read/sign a marriage certificate if you love them that much. ALLOW BESTIALITY! ALLOW PEOPLE TO MARRY THEIR PETS!
o.O
-
Woman with many husbands is called polyandry not polygamy :P
-
except for the incest bit
Well incest could be consensual. And no one said anything about having kids, they could use contraception, but currently that is still illegal.
And without wishing to be too controversial (lol who am I kidding) some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
-
Why not take this to it's logical extreme and allow incest?
Why not? As long as it is between two consenting adults and they clearly know the potential ramifications of having a child together.
It would be illogical to ban it on that basis unless you also banned alcoholic/drug-addicted/etc. women from having children.
Woman with many husbands is called polyandry not polygamy :P
My bad :P
-
except for the incest bit
No... most incest cases do actually involve consenting adults. Infact 10% of all marriages worldwide occur between first or second cousins
I know what you're thinking. Joseph Fritzl etc? Well that was rape, not two consenting adults in a relationship. So yes, in that particular case it does violate human rights
The question is, where can they draw the line on infringing human rights and say enough is enough. I have a feeling in the future a lot more of these things will become legal.
-
some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
And with "all due respect" (lol who am i kidding), those people are small minded idiots with no factual basis for that assertion whatsoever.
You are very susceptible to the fearmongering and brainwashing of your elders.
-
And without wishing to be too controversial (lol who am I kidding) some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
Moreso than being raised by abusive heterosexual parents?
-
The question is, where can they draw the line on infringing human rights and say enough is enough. I have a feeling in the future a lot more of these things will become legal.
Now which other discussion on this board could that be relevant to? ;)
some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
And with "all due respect" (lol who am i kidding), those people are small minded idiots with no factual basis for that assertion whatsoever.
You are very susceptible to the fearmongering and brainwashing of your elders.
I never said that I believed that, and indeed I don't. I was just putting it out there for discussion.
-
And without wishing to be too controversial (lol who am I kidding) some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
Moreso than being raised by abusive heterosexual parents?
No, which is why kids should be taken away from abusive parents, whatever the sexuality.
-
No, which is why kids should be taken away from abusive parents, whatever the sexuality.
In that case, why make a generalist statement encompassing all homosexuals rather than "abusive homosexuals"? (in fact, why even mention their sexuality then? Abusive is abusive is abusive, regardless of whether you're gay, straight, bi, transgender, black, white, yellow etc.)
-
some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
Key phrase: "some would say"
-
Ah, shall I assume Yitzi doesn't espouse such bigoted views then but is merely passing on the message from "some"? :)
-
No, which is why kids should be taken away from abusive parents, whatever the sexuality.
In that case, why make a generalist statement encompassing all homosexuals rather than "abusive homosexuals"? (in fact, why even mention their sexuality then? Abusive is abusive is abusive, regardless of whether you're gay, straight, bi, transgender, black, white, yellow etc.)
Because there are people (I am NOT one of them) who say that any child raised by homosexual parents is likely to be adversely affected. I was just comparing that claim to the idea that incest results in screwed up children.
-
Incest screws up the kids' health.
-
The question is, where can they draw the line on infringing human rights and say enough is enough. I have a feeling in the future a lot more of these things will become legal.
Now which other discussion on this board could that be relevant to? ;)
some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
And with "all due respect" (lol who am i kidding), those people are small minded idiots with no factual basis for that assertion whatsoever.
You are very susceptible to the fearmongering and brainwashing of your elders.
I never said that I believed that, and indeed I don't. I was just putting it out there for discussion.
Hahahaha sure, buddy :) You've made your views very clear that you do not like homosexuality and do not even want it acknowledged in society.
You can hide behind "some would say", but you're not fooling anyone...
-
Incest screws up the kids' health.
What if the incestuous couple choose not to have children
-
Incest screws up the kids' health.
What if the incestuous couple choose not to have children
Great choice!
-
I don't understand why enwiabe is defending homosexuals' rights yet disapproves of polygamist Muslims. Shouldn't we grant everyone their right in this case?
-
I don't understand why enwiabe is defending homosexuals' rights yet disapproves of polygamist Muslims. Shouldn't we grant everyone their right in this case?
Very 1D view, here. It's all about harm minimisation. Sure, you could get proper consenting polygamy, but that'd be the exception and not the rule. Too often, polygamy relies on an abuse of rights, mainly abusing women.
It is for similar reasons that it is illegal to carry knives in public. Sure, 95% of people would be responsible about it, but 5% wouldn't...
Now in this case, the proportions would be even worse. So in this case, it needs to be outlawed for proper harm minimisation.
-
Would you say that polyandry is 'the abuse of men'?
Btw, doesn't that mean the government should search for and ban sex between more than 2 parties.
-
Sure, you could get proper consenting polygamy, but that'd be the exception and not the rule. Too often, polygamy relies on an abuse of rights, mainly abusing women.
Do you have a "factual basis for that assertion"? That in muslim countries which allow polygamy - wifes in a relationship with a polygamist man are abused to a greater extent then the average wife of that same region, who is in a non-polygamist relationship?
-
Would you say that polyandry is 'the abuse of men'?
Btw, doesn't that mean the government should search for and ban sex between more than 2 parties.
I don't see how your second point relates to your first
-
Marrying multiple men or being in a sexual relationship with many men is similar. Although Australia disallow polygamy and polyandry, several married men and women have sexual relationships with other parties(cheat on their partners). So what's the big deal about polygamy and polyandry? Just the marriage certificate?
-
Why don't we cancel the whole idea of marriage? What's the point of commitment?
-
Although Australia disallow polygamy and polyandry, several married men and women have sexual relationships with other parties(cheat on their partners). So what's the big deal about polygamy and polyandry? Just the marriage certificate?
Why are you implying that sex = marriage?
-
marriage = commitment, what's wrong with being commited to more than one person?
-
Why don't we cancel the whole idea of marriage? What's the point of commitment?
lol thats a little shortsighted; just because some dishonour their commitment and cheat on their partner doesn't mean the whole prospect of marriage should be scrapped. There may be many mitigating circumstances which resulted in them cheating.
Why do some priests molest children when it is against the morals their religion is supposed to provide? What's the point of religion if some of these preists act this way?
key word = 'some'
My point is its stupid to question some things based on the acts of a few individuals.
-
marriage = commitment, what's wrong with being commited to more than one person?
Ask the government. They make the legislation.
-
marriage = commitment, what's wrong with being commited to more than one person?
Ask the government. They make the legislation.
cos it'll cost them votes
-
sooooo many votes......
-
No, which is why kids should be taken away from abusive parents, whatever the sexuality.
In that case, why make a generalist statement encompassing all homosexuals rather than "abusive homosexuals"? (in fact, why even mention their sexuality then? Abusive is abusive is abusive, regardless of whether you're gay, straight, bi, transgender, black, white, yellow etc.)
Because there are people (I am NOT one of them) who say that any child raised by homosexual parents is likely to be adversely affected. I was just comparing that claim to the idea that incest results in screwed up children.
Yes but society is changing and things that aren't accepted in the present have been accepted in the future.
Incest screws up the kids' health.
Exactly.
-
When I think of an ideal society in the future, it is one that has the greatest standards of living for every individual.
Greatest standards of living equates to greatest personal freedoms without harming others.
With this in mind, polyandry and polygamy, when consensual, should be legal.
In addition, if science progresses enough to eliminate the birth defects associated with incest, then it should also be legal, no matter how disgusting we might find it.
And without wishing to be too controversial (lol who am I kidding) some would say that allowing homosexuals to raise kids also screws them up for life...
I agree. But this is because of society's inability to accept such families. They will get the shit kicked out of them in school.
-
If a 14 year old kid had lesbian parents, he'd be the most popular guy at school.
I'm just sayin'
-
LOL.....bump it up a few more year to 16/17 then defsssssssss :P
-
Lol!
-
Regarding children with same-sex parents
http://www.webmd.com/parenting/news/20100607/kids-of-lesbian-parents-are-well-adjusted
-
Why don't we cancel the whole idea of marriage? What's the point of commitment?
Originally, it was to create a lasting union necessary to raise/bring resources to children and continue the human species. I would say that it has taken on a different meaning today though. It's to express smugness on the fact that you've found someone (or some people?) you don't hate and you'd like to spend a lot of time with them and you feel the need to tell this to others in a large ceremony.
-
I don't understand why enwiabe is defending homosexuals' rights yet disapproves of polygamist Muslims. Shouldn't we grant everyone their right in this case?
Very 1D view, here. It's all about harm minimisation. Sure, you could get proper consenting polygamy, but that'd be the exception and not the rule. Too often, polygamy relies on an abuse of rights, mainly abusing women.
It is for similar reasons that it is illegal to carry knives in public. Sure, 95% of people would be responsible about it, but 5% wouldn't...
Now in this case, the proportions would be even worse. So in this case, it needs to be outlawed for proper harm minimisation.
You have pretty much hit the nail on the head enwiabe, however I am sure that there are many that would disagree with your premise of curtailing individual liberties for the "greater good".
-
If homosexuality was to be allowed, shouldn't we allow polygamy and polyandry as well?
Grant the public their rights!
Good point there, monogamy is so restricting so polygamy and polyandry should be allowed. I feel fed by the restrictive nature monogamy, down with it.
-
Only reason why incest is illegal is because the kids end up retarded.
In other words kids end up inbred, like mice.