New US polygamy debate begins

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Feb 4, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

  2. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Well if you extend it to keeping Hareems, you get my vote ;)

    (edited to add on a more serious note, polygamy is already allowed, you just have to marry in a mosque and not have it registered (i.e. at a registry office or with a registar present), there we go, easy....)
  3. Who in their right mind would want the extra grief of having 2+ bints moaning at you day and night?
  4. The question is not so easy as one may think.

    Indeed, what is the difference between polygamy and homosexualism? From fromal point of view free citizens of a free country freely decide how their private sexual life should go. So what is wrong?

    As for me personally I'm against polygamy, against special rights for homosexuals.
  5. I'm all for it, the missus isn't so keen but I'm trying to convince her.

    Half the housework, another salary meaning a better house etc etc etc. It's all in her favour really.

  6. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Take it you failed biology then Serge ;)
  7. Nope, but once again it appears that the right to religious freedom is more important (at least in the eyes of the christian zealots), than the right to freedom of speech or the right not to be discriminated against. :shakefist:
  8. I'd be interested to hear why the majority of posters on this thread so far are opposed to polygamy (and I assume polyandry)?

    From my (very limited) understanding of how polygamy is practiced in places such as Utah, I'm opposed to it morally due to the likelihood of women's interests being marginalized and intrinsic hypocrisy if polyandry isn't permitted.

    However, women's rights being sidelined doesn't appear to be a necessary consequence of polygamy - perhaps marginalization of women occurs due to other factors in the societies in which it's practiced, and polygamy shouldn't be blamed.

    There's a further question of the legitimacy of state intervention: how much harm (or risk of harm) needs to occur before state intervention into what is essentially a private matter is justified?

    The issue ultimately, for me, turns on whether coercion occurs or not: if all parties freely enter into a polygamous relationship and if third parties aren't significantly harmed as a result, I can't see what the problem is.
  9. Anyone see a slight shift from a 'free world'?

    And don't mention polygamy to the Royal Marines, roll mat rape anyone?
  10. The question's pretty damn clear from where I sit! Sergei, I'm worried about you. ;-)
  11. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Seconded. I have enough drama with one :biggrin:
  12. Don't worry... be happy. Personally I'm an extreme conservator in these matters. From my point of view polygamy is absolutely unacceptable in the democratic society. As for homosexuals then they should not have any special rights. They can if they wish to sign contracts about property share, about mutual help and so on as other citizens that decided to live together. Their sexual life is their private business and they must be banned to openly say about it in public.

    By asking my question I meant that special rights for homosexuals could lead to absurd decisions, to official recognition of polygamy (indeed what is the difference?). I strongly believe that only usual pair (man&woman) has right to adopt children. So in this question I strongly disagree with highly esteemed mr.Blair.
  13. In my time in Mid East where locals where allowed 4 wives, it was rare to find men with more then one wife.
    A few of the well connected, Senior Officers, has more then one, but these where accepted as Political marriages, more to do with Clan/Tribal alliances.
    The only case I was aware of of an Ordinary man with more then one wife was a guy who had the full set 4, all sisiters of his first wife, their parents had passed on and he had 'Inherited' the girls into his family and had married them for reasons of 'Face.
    When you talk/Joked with the young lads that we where training they all said that unless the wifes all got along well (Sisters or the Man was sufficently well off to have multipule homes then multy wives was not practical, they would fight like 'cats'.
    In Thighland the concept of Mia Noy ( Minor Wife) is widely accepted. If a man can keep a second or multiple of weomen in similar style to Main wife, then custom/tradition has tended to allow it. These are not Legal wives but it is not 'Disgraceful' for a weoman to be the Mia Noy of a rich succesufull bussinesman.
    Thai girls will refer to their 'Gik' a casual male used for sexual relief and not a regular Partner. Thai males have an even lower opinion of casual weomen especially honkey bitches who cum out just to get serviced by a Thai stud.
  14. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    Don't see what the fuss is about. Its a personal lifestyle choice surely? Why do people always insist on telling other people how to live their lives, just don't understand that.