Polygamy

[mwm]

Just curious what everyone's views are on polygamy, I can't seem to find any verses that say Polygamy is wrong.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friend,

Traditionally, polygamy has involved a patriarchal family structure where one man has many wives. If one believes that patriarchy is oppressive to women, and that such oppression is against the gospel, one might oppose that form of polygamy.

I do agree with you, though, that the claim by many Christians that scripture only allows heterosexual monogamy and brands all other forms of sexuality as wrong is just not backed up by scripture.

Polyamory--relationships among more that two person at a time--I'm not sure that I could endorse it. To me the moral issue would be: does it do harm? Is it consistent with the commandment of love? I have my doubts. I really haven't known anyone in a successful, long-term polyamorous relationship. But I'm willing to withhold judgment.

Steven

[Alecto]

I can't vouch for "long term", but I have friends in a polyamourous relationship, and theirs is one of the healthier ones I know. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be right for me, but I'm certainly not going to say it's wrong for anyone else.

How that impacts my views on public policy? I haven't even really thought about the word marriage: I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on that cause I don't think it matters. I do think it should be a LOT easier for anyone to define their own "family" in the eyes of the law: if I have REALLY good friends that I decide I want to live with in the long term, possibly the rest of my life, is there some reason I shouldn't be able to have them legally recognized in place of a biological family that could (hypothetically) have little or nothing to do with me anymore? I'm not trying to be dismissive of other people's relationships (by immediately jumping to friendships), but I do think that we as a society need to start thinking beyond the concept of "marriage" as far as how we view people's choices about their legal definition of their family.

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by mwm

Just curious what everyone's views are on polygamy, I can't seem to find any verses that say Polygamy is wrong.

I am polyamorous. I have five people that I am in love with. It is what we call our love circle. below is a link to an extensive discussion.

My challenge to the concept that mmonogamy is natural is this:

Name one species of primate that is by nature monogamous (and homo sapiens isn't one of them).

then go further

Name one species of mammal that is by nature monogamous.


http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3313

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Name one species of primate that is by nature monogamous (and homo sapiens isn't one of them).

http://www.anthro.ucdavis.edu/facult...rt/stptiti.htm

The Titi monkey

also....

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~phyl/anthro/mating.html

Monogamy:
Prosimian- at least one species of tarsier.
New world monkey- titi monkey, night monkey, callitrichids.
Old world monkey- langur/mentawi island leaf monkey.
Ape- Gibbon.

Polygyny:
Prosimian- lemur.
New world monkey- howlers, cebus monkey.
Old world monkey- most of leaf monkeys, langurs, family presbytis, macaques.
Ape- gorilla.

Polyandry: (rare in primates)
New world monkey only- some of the callitrichids are "facultatively" polyandrous. This means they're not always so, but they can and in some cases tend to be.

Promiscuity:
New world monkey- marikis.
Apes- chimps.

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

then go further

Name one species of mammal that is by nature monogamous.

It seems there is one (buried in a footnote on this page)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy

Richardson, P.R.K. (1987). Aardwolf mating system: overt cuckoldry in an apparently monogamous mammal. South African Journal of Science, 83, 405-412.

---------

Looks like there is a lot of different mating systems within primates. So, one could argue both sides of the coin- as it were.

What does this prove? Diversity. That's what I think.

[scott snedeker]

Yours is the first Genuinely informative answer to this Question I have put forth for years. Good for you! Daniel! What I do find is that researchers have to reaaly look far an wide to find their tiny minority of examples, and then in extreme circumstances.

My bias has been expressed here on this forum many tiimes before in part to counter what I sense is a judeo-chrisitian heterosexist residue. How much of our belief that being "monogamous" is natural and preferable in same-gender relationships is living up to a monogamous heterosexist standard? How much of it is our mind that was taught to be self judgemental and unworthy of living true to our nature? How much of it is fear of losing legal ground by offending too many straight people. (lifeboat politics) How much of it is fear of being betrayed? or HIV? How much of it is denial of self acceptance? "I'll accept this much that I intimately love my own gender, but I'll never accept that I am in love with three people, that's just wrong!"

Many have defended their decision to be "monogamous" stating that it is their perference and true to their desires, but I point out that many of us do not have a good past track record when it comes to being true to our hearts with elborate justification for our self betrayal.

If you genuinely have made the choice to be monogamous in order to be true to your heart, then I would not expect my challenges to generate feelings of defensiveness. If these rise then I suggest you examine your feelings to see if maybe, just maybe, you might have more detachment from monogamous heterosexist oppression to do in order to free your heart from this joy killer, this life killer.

We are what we are. If you indeed choose monogamy and it is not betraying your heart, that is a wonderful joy. If you are not living true to your heart and feel trapped by your mate but love him/her, I'm not saying that I consider you inadequate. I'm suggesting that there might be a better way to free yourself and the ones you love. we learn by doing.

polyamory and polygamy

Mormons had practiced polygamy, but it was one-sided and male dominated. Syrians can still practice polygamy but the number of wives is limited to four according to one of my Syrian colleagues. This is also male-dominated. One woman cannot have four husbands in Syria.

My experience living with and loving in a group has been one of sharing and exchange of love. Polyamory has been gaining much ground on websites like tribe.net and others. I am never so content than when we are all loving together. Members of other love circles tell me this also.

[Unmasked]

Marriage is defined as society requires it to be. Muslims allow for multiple wives because the culture discourages women in the workplace, and so they allow a man to care for as many women as he is able. Some places practice polyandry because their resources and demographics require it. In America, monogamy works best as a legal definition for marriage.

We are built for both monogamy and non-monogamy. The only circumstances I can say that I find non-monogamy immoral are in those where it is physically or emotionally harmful to people. Whatever is edifying is good for Man.

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Yours is the first Genuinely informative answer to this Question I have put forth for years. Good for you! Daniel! What I do find is that researchers have to reaaly look far an wide to find their tiny minority of examples, and then in extreme circumstances.

I mean, don't I get a prize or something? Oh...but I forget. Tupperware is given out to those who CONVERT straight folks to the gay lifestyle!

Actually, I only spent about 10 minutes researching online. Amazing what you can find on the world-wide web. I was curious to find out an answer to your questions. And lo and behold, there is some info out there! I don't think, however, that it tells us anything about human behavior in terms of monogamy or not.

What this discussion does tell me is that one's beliefs affect how one acts, or at least, how one thinks one acts. As such, this whole discussion may be about self-awareness.

Using objective facts to buttress one's belief's is one thing. But seeing and experiencing one's nature outside of an imposed system of belief is another thing. Of course, it is all too easy to say that one's version of belief is the default setting for everyone else. Better, I think, to observe what people actually do, not what they say they do.

And my sense is that, san restrictions, men -especially- are prone to being non-monogamous.

[BruceChris]

I mean, don't I get a prize or something? Oh...but I forget. Tupperware is given out to those who CONVERT straight folks to the gay lifestyle!

And some of the "Pro-Family" types keep telling us that gay marriage will inevitably lead to the legalization of Polygamy!

BC

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Wanderer]

...that unless something abusive is going on, people should be allowed to figure their sexualities out for themselves. It's really nobody else's business.

Just my $0.02.

Wanderer

[andrewlittle]

Originally Posted by BruceChris

And some of the "Pro-Family" types keep telling us that gay marriage will inevitably lead to the legalization of Polygamy

In light of this fact, isn't it interesting that someone's first post is about polygamy and then follows up with a commentary about the lack of morals on this site based on the answers to that question. http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6215

[Rick336]

I don't think about polygamy enough to even form an opinion.



Rick

[RedneckDyke]

I only know that I wouldn't want to practice polygamy myself. I have one waife, more than one would be way to much for me to handle!

[antiochian]

People should be able to do what they want, as long as no one is being hurt. My only concern with polygamy lies in the extent to which it dehumanizes and objectifies women, making them the "pets" of one husband. However, if a woman is okay with that situation and has a say in the matter, so be it.

I can see some definite pros to polyamory. When one mate is annoying the heck out of me, I can go spend some time with man #2. I can imagine the love that must exist in many close-knit group of lovers, and the energy.

On the con side, I'm guessing more personalities equal more occasions for dispute and drama. Also, I tend to be jealous. And finally, 10 husbands equals 10 birthdays and anniversaries to remember, and 10 times the Christmas shopping. Yikes.