I support marriage arrangements between any combination of legally consenting adults. Force, coercion, mental incapacity, and other restrictions would apply (same as in any marriage).
While I disagree on a personal level with the religious belief that a man should have multiple wives (but not the opposite), I will not deny someone the right to have that marital arrangement *IF* all parties involved actually WANT it. If it's what makes them all happy, then I fully support their right to form that family unit, and to have the legal backing to protect that family.
I have friends who are polyamorous (different from polygamy in that it's not a patriarchal arrangement). I've know triads and quads who have been together for YEARS. Decades in one case. All in the relationship are consenting and happy. Why should they not be able to protect their families?
Seriously, the "one man, one woman" arrangement is NOT a universal standard for marriage in all cultures. Not even close. It might be the most common in this day and age and society, but it's not the only arrangement that's been the standard for all societies.
So, to reiterate, I believe that marriage arrangements should be open to all combinations of consenting, mentally competent, human adults.
I would actually want to strike down the laws that allow those under the age of 18 to legally wed if it were up to me. They can't even legally vote, smoke, or get their own credit card, for cripe's sake. So, no "kids" in marriages. And the argument about "marrying" your dog, cat, blow-up doll, or any other such nonsense is a complete red herring, as none of those things can sign a legal contract, much less legally consent to anything.
For those who wish to argue "but how many people can go on your health insurance policy?" stuff... I personally believe we should have universal health care, end of story. But in our current system, because health care is private, I would have no problem with each person being able to designate more than one other adult on a policy. I mean, they've still got to pay the premiums, right? And isn't it a GOOD thing to have more people insured, rather than uninsured? Or hell, insurance isn't marriage - maybe the law could allow you to designate one (and only one) adult of your choice, plus your offspring.
Anyway, that's enough rambling. Those are my opinions.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 13/7/11 21:50 (UTC)While I disagree on a personal level with the religious belief that a man should have multiple wives (but not the opposite), I will not deny someone the right to have that marital arrangement *IF* all parties involved actually WANT it. If it's what makes them all happy, then I fully support their right to form that family unit, and to have the legal backing to protect that family.
I have friends who are polyamorous (different from polygamy in that it's not a patriarchal arrangement). I've know triads and quads who have been together for YEARS. Decades in one case. All in the relationship are consenting and happy. Why should they not be able to protect their families?
Seriously, the "one man, one woman" arrangement is NOT a universal standard for marriage in all cultures. Not even close. It might be the most common in this day and age and society, but it's not the only arrangement that's been the standard for all societies.
So, to reiterate, I believe that marriage arrangements should be open to all combinations of consenting, mentally competent, human adults.
I would actually want to strike down the laws that allow those under the age of 18 to legally wed if it were up to me. They can't even legally vote, smoke, or get their own credit card, for cripe's sake. So, no "kids" in marriages. And the argument about "marrying" your dog, cat, blow-up doll, or any other such nonsense is a complete red herring, as none of those things can sign a legal contract, much less legally consent to anything.
For those who wish to argue "but how many people can go on your health insurance policy?" stuff... I personally believe we should have universal health care, end of story. But in our current system, because health care is private, I would have no problem with each person being able to designate more than one other adult on a policy. I mean, they've still got to pay the premiums, right? And isn't it a GOOD thing to have more people insured, rather than uninsured? Or hell, insurance isn't marriage - maybe the law could allow you to designate one (and only one) adult of your choice, plus your offspring.
Anyway, that's enough rambling. Those are my opinions.