1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Homosexuality, Incest and Polygamy

Discussion in 'Political Debates' started by bartdanr, Nov 17, 2005.

  1. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,667
    Ratings:
    +2,657
    Good post Ceridwen; I agree. The points you make about polygamy or polyandry are, from my point of view, to be seen in the light of the social effect, and how such a system would influence the family unit.

    As I related earlier, having heard people in polygamous relationships interviewed, ther greatest problem seemed to be with jealousy between the wives, and the feelings of a need for each one to prove herself 'better' than the next.

    The only fully satisfied member of the family (hardly unsurprisingly) was the husband, although he did have one comment to make; "Imagine being nagged at by many wives instead of just the one".........my heart bled for him.

    I wonder though, if there have ever been societies where one wife has had more than one husband......well, what is good for the Gander...........

    I agree with you about the points you make about incest; the subject is one which evokes many unpleasant emotions....and the fact that" in some states, kids can be married as young as 10 with parental consent--some states don't even have limits, just so they can legally sexually abuse them? " is one that I hadn't even thought of - it is completely alien to us here; I don't even want 'to go there'.
     
  2. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    I wasn't aware of that... I was going to say if there aren't any laws against it that it's not like denying them marriage rights would stop them, but I guess that shoots that argument down. :)
    I think if someone of very close kin (first cousins, siblings, aunt and nephew, whatever other combinations you can come up with) wants to wed, one should undergo sterilization. It would be irresponsible to not make sure children can't be produced.
    Exactly. There's no reason to deny people marriage rights just because it makes us go 'eeewwww!' (Unless someone's being hurt. It seems every time I say something about marriage I need to throw that disclaimer in. ;))
    IMO, to let two (should be two or more, I believe) individuals obtain the rights associated with marriage (time off work when a partner's sick, hospital visitation rights, etc).
     
  3. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    76,126
    Ratings:
    +37,789
    Religion:
    Non-Theistic Mysticism
    I've never heard of a healthy case of incest where one or both partners didn't come to regret it and feel harmed by it. Has anyone?

    Basically, I'm staunchly against homosexuality and polygamy for the same fundamental reason: Someone out there might be having more fun than me.:sarcastic
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    I recall a case on Oprah or somesuch a while back where a half brother and sister got married and were in a happy relationship until they found out they had the same father. From what I remember, the woman was rather upset by it. I didn't watch to see how it ended, though. :areyoucra
     
  5. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    76,126
    Ratings:
    +37,789
    Religion:
    Non-Theistic Mysticism
    Sometimes the people you see on talk shows like Oprah are actors paid to dramatize the issues by posing as "real people". (If you ever get a chance, check out the help wanted ads in the Village Voice for talk shows soliciting actors to appear on their shows as "real people") I don't know if Oprah is one of the talk shows that uses paid actors, but I know the practice is widespread. So, I would be cautious about accepting an incestous couple seen on Oprah as true and real.
     
  6. jamaesi

    jamaesi To Save A Lamb

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Messages:
    4,695
    Ratings:
    +835
    I've been looking up on Google for pro-incest materials- and really only coming up with websites for incest abuse surviviours and, well, some awful pornogaphy.

    Royal families practiced incest, and it's somewhat common in parts of the Middle East- probably other places too, but I don't know for a fact... and some of those relationships turned out happy.

    I'm grabbing at straws now, but- there was an incestous relationship in Gone With the Wind where they didn't seem harmed by it. (Well, Miss O'Hara was, but she wasn't in the relationship.)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. bartdanr

    bartdanr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    161
    Ratings:
    +29
    Hi Jensa, thanks for your post.

    Do we really want to open the can of worms of having the state require that certain individuals be sterilized? What would stop the state from requiring people with other genetic diseases to be forcibly sterilized? Can we really single out just incest?

    BTW, I really appreciate that people in general have not gotten really emotional and irrational in this debate. It's refreshing to see people acting like civil human beings. :)

    Peace
     
  8. bartdanr

    bartdanr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    161
    Ratings:
    +29
    Hi Cerdiwen, thanks for your post.

    I appreciate what you said. However, I made it clear in the OP that I was not talking about minors, but about consenting adults.

    Now, I think we should examine the wisdom of allowing young children to marry, regardless of the laws regarding incest. I'd view it as sexual abuse for a 10 year old child to marry, regardless if their spouse was a relative or not.

    So if we limited the discussion to consenting adults (say at least age 18, if not 21), what legal basis can or should we use to limit the right to marry? I don't find the birth defect argument particularly compelling, unless we look at fairly applying the law--that is, not allowing marriage of others who are likely to pass on birth defects to their children.

    Now, what you said about the legal ramifications of polygamy/polyandry: I agree, it could enormously complicate matters. But what are the legal benefits and/or detriments to marriage? Should they exist? What is the purpose of the legal recognition of marriage at all? (I'm not saying there is no purpose, but I'd really like to know the rationale used behind any marriage law, even heterosexual monagamous marriage.)

    Peace
     
  9. standing_alone

    standing_alone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    6,724
    Ratings:
    +1,038
    Here's my view on the matter. I'm not even going to go into incest, just homosexual marriage and polygamy. To me, marraige is (or should be) an institution for two adults only (based on love, hopefully) to declare that they are dedicating their lives to take care of their partner, to be the first person that that person has for aid in any sickness or problem. They are making a public vow that they, and not the state, will be responsible for the care of that person first. To me, polygamy would not be able to meet this criteria, since I don't think the one spouse could aduequetely care for all of their other spouses in the whole dedicating time to care for that person and fufill their vows. A marriage of two (and only two) heterosexuals or homosexuals can fufill this obligation. I hope you all follow what I'm saying. Another thing with polygamy is that, historically, it was based on a hierarchy where (typically) higher class men would take several wives and generally the more wives he had, the higher his status. Also, polygamy was often used to dominate women. I'm not saying that this is always the case, this is just my view on this matter.
     
  10. bartdanr

    bartdanr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    161
    Ratings:
    +29
    Hi Standing, thanks for the post.

    Your definition makes a lot of sense, and I can see how it could be used to support monogamous marriage. It also is entering into a legally-enforceable contract (i.e., a partner could be help legally responsible when the other partner needs assistance).

    I would further add that marriage is used to protect children, if any, that result from a marriage. (Even in a homosexual marriage there could be adoption). The partners in a marriage become legally responsible for the well-being of the children in this family. Of course, parents are still legally responsible for children that result from sexual activity outside of marriage (though sperm donation is a complication to this general rule.)

    What are some other people's thoughts on this? What is the purpose in legally defining marriage? If it was only a declaration of love, then I would think that there should be no legal recognition of marriage--just a religious or social ceremony. I think that if the State is to get involved in recognizing marriages, then it must be something more.

    Peace
     
  11. James the Persian

    James the Persian Dreptcredincios Crestin

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,416
    Ratings:
    +654
    I know of one, though I'm not sure if they still follow the practice. It certainly used to be reasonably common in some Tibetan communities that a woman would marry two brothers. I don't recall hearing of there ever being more than two husbands or of the husbands being unrelated, but this arrangement seems to have had practical reasons revolving around the difficulties of a semi-nomadic lifestyle of yak herding. If I remember correctly (though what I know is poorly remembered information gleaned from a lama in my Buddhist past) both husbands were considered to be equally the father of any offspring regardless of whose it was biologically - there are, of course, obvious practical reasons for this!

    James
     
  12. bartdanr

    bartdanr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    161
    Ratings:
    +29
    Hi James, thanks for posting.

    I saw a travelog show on TV several months ago, and they showed a modern wedding ceremony where a Tibetan woman was marrying three men (well, two were really no more than boys). I think, but I'm not sure, that the men/boys were all brothers.

    Peace
     
Loading...