Polygamy recognized in Canada

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

And the reasons for this have been explained 3 times in this thread.

I assume you read them, and yet still ask the question? Interesting.

I am not talking about having children, I am talking about marriage. If a father and daughter decide to get married without having children, is that ok to you?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Also, I am not sure why you keep bring gay's into this. This thread is about polygamy. Thats what I have been discussing. If you think I have been talking about not allowing gays to marry, maybe you should re-read my posts.

The only time I talked about gay marriage is when I said that they do not fit the definition of marriage. If they want to marry and call it something else such as gay marriage fine, whatever, all the power to them, it really doesnt effect me. And quite frankly keeping it the same as just marriage really doesnt bother me personally, but I can definately see why people who are strongly against calling gay marriage the same as marriage against it.

I guess we can implement the double standard here whenever you feel like not answering a question? You trot out the fact that this thread is about Polygamy, and quickly ask a question concerning father/daugher marriage. Nice.

Feel free to debate some of the points I actually bring up some time and we might stop running around in circles.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am not talking about having children, I am talking about marriage. If a father and daughter decide to get married without having children, is that ok to you?

Sure. Though, again, I'm not fearful of a society trending towards parent/child marriage, so I don't see it as a problem. I figure most people will probably still be more interested in parties other than their parents. I'm also not worried that a generation of fathers will seduce their daughters sexually. But if you're truly afraid of this possibility... polish up that picket sign, one day you'll need it.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The only time I talked about gay marriage is when I said that they do not fit the definition of marriage. If they want to marry and call it something else such as gay marriage fine, whatever, all the power to them, it really doesnt effect me.

If it doesn't 'effect' you, why do you care what they call it?

And quite frankly keeping it the same as just marriage really doesnt bother me personally, but I can definately see why people who are strongly against calling gay marriage the same as marriage against it.

If you're against calling it marriage, you're one of them.

[elpatzer]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Let me give a bit of a silly example to get across what I'm saying.

I meet a nice girl. A month into the relationship we find we are always at each other's houses, so she moves in with me. She helps out with the bills, and we are all lovey-dovey.

Seven months later she is tired of me leaving the toilet seat up, and decides to leave me. Because we have been living together for more than 6 months, she is now entitled to half of my stuff. This is due to the current "common law" marriage laws.

Well, I'm not a marriage lawyer but I would think it would strongly depend on what kind of decisions she made in those 7 months. If she decided to drop out of school and look after you (maintain your house and cook for you ... blah blah blah) then yes she would be owed half of all the possessions you aquired over those 7 months.

Originally Posted by ken0042

Now, if we had gotten married it would be a different story. But I didn't decide that I wanted to be married.

Or here's another example. I get myself a female room mate. She goes around telling people that we are sleeping together, when we aren't. After being room mates for a year she leaves, and tries to sue saying we were common law. It is now up to me to prove that we didn't sleep together.

Then it becomes a question of what if we did sleep together once or twice? Does the fact that we got drunk once and fell into bed together entitle her to $150K?

Now with same sex marriage; the same thing could happen here. That's why I think that gay or straight, it should be up to the couple to say "we want to be an official couple."

As in the other example, sex isn't enough. Interestingly sex is a requirement in a marriage but sex doesn't imply a marriage (or common law relationship). To the best of my knowledge she would have to have performed non financial benefits to the household. That is to say she would have had to given up a job in order to maintain your household.

In essence women "getting half" is mostly protection for them not having earned money or developed a career so they could benefit the household and further your career and your earning potential. Also, once children enter the relationship she may have acted as the caregiver of your children while you went out and earned money and bought things for the household. Surely, she should be entitled to a portion of these even if she wasn't "married" to you.

Or in the mini corporation analogy, most of her work was "non billable" however it was no less important to the maintenance of the corporation.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

So... we're not actually debating here at all, you're just yanking our chains?

Fun.

Actually, no. When you reach a certain point where people always try to turn your questions around and make "you" answer them, there isn't any point in debating.

I've reached my conclusion with you, so there is nothing more to talk about.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

I guess we can implement the double standard here whenever you feel like not answering a question? You trot out the fact that this thread is about Polygamy, and quickly ask a question concerning father/daugher marriage. Nice.

Feel free to debate some of the points I actually bring up some time and we might stop running around in circles.

Your the one that brought up the father/son marriage. You seemed ok with it. However, you didnt reallylike the idea of father/daughter. To stick with the topic of the tread maybe we should make it father/daughter/daughter. Is that ok with you if no children are produced?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Actually, no. When you reach a certain point where people always try to turn your questions around and make "you" answer them, there isn't any point in debating.

Where have I been turning your questions around? What are you talking about? I've answered every query straight up in this thread. Point out a question I've dodged, or retract your false statement.

I've reached my conclusion with you, so there is nothing more to talk about.

I haven't a clue what you're talking about. If you don't like my ideology, fine, but no need to be a jerk about it. I've argued in a civil manner through this entire debate.

[Azure]

Where have I been turning your questions around? What are you talking about? I've answered every query straight up in this thread. Point out a question I've dodged, or retract your false statement.

Not you. I have absolutely not problem with your posts, or your answers. I think we have come to a conclusion in this thread, considering we practically agree on the same thing.

I haven't a clue what you're talking about. If you don't like my ideology, fine, but no need to be a jerk about it. I've argued in a civil manner through this entire debate.

Not being a jerk. Seriously, I don't think I can argue with you anymore.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Not you. I have absolutely not problem with your posts, or your answers. I think we have come to a conclusion in this thread, considering we practically agree on the same thing.



Not being a jerk. Seriously, I don't think I can argue with you anymore.

Well... ok then. Guess I'm the jerk

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Well... ok then. Guess I'm the jerk

You and Azure should get married.



Interestingly, a related topic is being debated on the Senate floor in the US--though apparently, even republicans admit that it won't go any farther.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060606/...MzBHNlYwM3MDM-

In my view, this is what conservatives should be mad about--the fact that their politicians manipulate these hot-button issues for cynical political gain--like they did in the last presidential election down here. In reality, I think most people know that the debate over gay marriage is over, the bad guys lost, and it's a matter of time before the courts begin to implement it.

Polygamy's another story. The problem with it, of course, is that it's frequently not consensual, as I understand it--but I'm no expert.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

You and Azure should get married.

I should dang well have the right to!

Polygamy's another story. The problem with it, of course, is that it's frequently not consensual, as I understand it--but I'm no expert.

Agreed. This is the 'main issue' with polygamy as far as I'm concerned; not whether or not it is inherently right or wrong, but whether or not there are situations where it is forced upon minors or people who are isolated and in distress.

Though, the same issues can arise from similarly isolated non-polygymous sections of society; namely a lack of choice over lifestyles due to lack of availability imposed by a group of adults.

A fine line, but I think it can be walked.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Well... ok then. Guess I'm the jerk

If you say so.....

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

You and Azure should get married.

Come on now, just because we get along so good....

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Come on now, just because we get along so good....

Grammar check: Get along so well.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Grammar check: Get along so well.