Polyamory in light of UUA Principles

[EverChanging]

Polyamory and the UUA

 

[blackout]

Thanks Everchanging.

That just made my day.

I think I actually Will (to) visit a local UU or two.
(it actually made it on today's "things to do" list. -
before I read your post)

 

[EverChanging]

I'm glad I sparked your interest. Most of my interaction with Unitarian Universalists has been confined to the net, unfortunately, but I'm going to visit the fellowship again Sunday to see Religulous.

As for Polyamory, there's no official position on it by the UUA and I'm certain there are a wide range of views on it, but even then, people from this group have been giving sermons and meeting at the General Convention, so I think most Unitarian Universalists are at least open to considering the idea.

 

[Kungfuzed]

Does this include polygamy? Does polyamory refer to orgys or just permiscuity?

 

[Nanda]

Does this include polygamy? Does polyamory refer to orgys or just permiscuity?

Polygamy is illegal in America. Those of us who live legally with multiple partners have to content ourselves with polyamory at the moment, and is not equivalent to having orgies or sleeping around, it's about having loving, committed relationships with more than one partner.

 

[EverChanging]

Polygamy is illegal in America. Those of us who live legally with multiple partners have to content ourselves with polyamory at the moment, and is not equivalent to having orgies or sleeping around, it's about having loving, committed relationships with more than one partner.

Right. Polyamory is about love, respect, and commitment just as monogamy is supposed to be. It is only different from monogamy in the family structure and including more than two people. Some polyamorous families have been together for years and their families work just fine. It's just a different structure. Women as well as men are allowed to have more than one partner, male or female.

Polyamory is not about orgies or promiscuity, either. It's not the same as swinging because a commitment is involved.

Edit: while some polyamorous families might be polygamous, that would only be in the case in which the female members of the family structure did not prefer to have a partner other than the one male member. Polyamory differs from polygamy in that even in a polygamous family structure, the women would still be free to have other partners, male or female.

I'm not really sure how multiple marriages would work out because it would be so complex. Perhaps polyamorous families could have some kind of contract that works for them, but I'm not really sure about the details or how that would work out.

The definition from the link is:

[SIZE=+1]UUPA defines polyamory as the philosophy and practice of loving or relating intimately to more than one other person at a time with honesty and integrity. UUPA advocates for any form of relationship or family structure -- whether monogamous or multi-partner -- which is characterized by free and responsible choice, mutual consent of all involved, and sincere adherence to personal philosophical values.[/SIZE]

 

[spectrm]

I know a number of polyamorous families and, despite the added complexity of additional adults in the house, there is a lot more 'down-time' as there are more bodies to care for the house and the children.

There are certainly benefits to a multi-partner arrangement. Polyamory is not 'an excuse' to have multiple partners. It's a consensus in the family that more love would be beneficial.

As much of an advocate for it as I am, I couldn't imagine trying to keep more than one partner happy. A friend tells me that if the two other partners like each other as much (not necessarily intimately), then one doesn't have to work to keep two people happy, just halves of two.

 

[Nanda]

Or you just need two partners with very simple needs.