2 Pages <12
queer is the new jewish! Options
Useless
#16 Posted: : Thursday, May 14, 2009 5:38:59 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered User

Joined: 4/4/2009
Posts: 36
Points: 108
endyss wrote:
I have a neighbor and her husband and between them they have EIGHT children (they just fall out at this point, I think). Crazy, but not at all unheard of. Trade a couple of those ankle biters in for spouses and you have basically the same situation.


Right, but those circumstances are accounted for when benefits (how much you pay, what they cover, etc) are figured out. Polygamy hasn't been accounted for in any of those agreements and I believe they would have to be gone over to make sure people don't cheat the system.
HolyJaw
#17 Posted: : Friday, May 15, 2009 10:39:35 AM
Rank: Fecal Impaction For the Win!

Groups: Ogamer, Registered User

Joined: 5/9/2006
Posts: 1,666
Points: 2,478
Location: La Habra, Orange, CA
To go back to Endyss' earlier point, in asking for justification as to why we shouldn't be open to polygamy if we're going in to re-write and re-interpret marriage laws:

What I like best about law is the "Average Person" identification. What would the average person do? What does the average person think?

The average person believes that two people should be together in eternal companionship, or at least till the end of life. Since before there was a notion of God as defined by Christian religion, since before most religions today were even around save the pagans and wiccans, humans have naturally flocked to the idea of two people. That's just how love works, baby.

We would not protect polygamy in our new laws because some crazy sects of people practice it just as much as we would not protect public nudity in our laws because some awesome sects of people practice it. The average person hasn't changed their mind on that. Not at all.
silverwasp wrote:
Be careful what you wish for... I have 10 younger siblings and I am only 20....

Yes.... Same parents


WarMachine wrote:
meh...maybe if he hadn't been handed a burning house he could have done great things, but right now he has won the Prize for what? Damage Control?
endyss
#18 Posted: : Friday, May 15, 2009 2:27:45 PM
Rank: Administration



Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin

Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
Honestly, there's a very simple reason why we won't see polygamy anytime soon and it has nothing to do with taxes or other justifications for why it'd be bad.

Simply put: bigamists don't have big lobbying groups.


HolyJaw wrote:
In the end, everything Endyss said.


Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages <12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.