Battle to Legalize Polygamy

[xoxoxoBruce]

We were discussing polygamy somewhere but my feeble mind can't remember the thread. Anyway the general feeling was it was a man's thing.....his desire and advantage.

But this article, in the Washington Post, paints a different picture. A movement by women to legalize polygamy.

Valerie and others among the estimated 40,000 men, women and children in polygamous communities are part of a new movement to decriminalize bigamy. Consciously taking tactics from the gay-rights movement, polygamists have reframed their struggle, choosing in interviews to de-emphasize their religious beliefs and focus on their desire to live "in freedom," according to Anne Wilde, director of community relations for Principle Voices, a pro-polygamy group based in Salt Lake.

In recent months, polygamy activists have held rallies, appeared on nationally televised news shows and lobbied legislators. Before the Nov. 7 elections, one pro-polygamy group issued a six-page analysis of all Utah's state and local candidates and their views on polygamy. "We can make a difference," the group told supporters.

The efforts of Valerie and scores of others like her are paying off. Utah's attorney general, Mark L. Shurtleff, no longer prosecutes bigamy between consenting adults, though it is a felony. Shurtleff and his staff have established an organization, Safety Net, to bring together at monthly meetings representatives from at least five polygamous communities and law enforcement officers. He has arranged to have representatives of polygamous groups address Utah police. And three years ago, he wrote legislation to reduce bigamy between adults from a felony to a misdemeanor, although pressure from Utah's county attorneys derailed that.

There is much more to the article, covering all the angles. It was a surprise to me, how many people are practicing it and are in favor of it.

[Iggy]

Polygamy has gotten a bad rap from the crazy men in rural communities (i.e. people like Warren Jeffs). Me and my SO have spoke extensively about polyamory (basically loving/caring for more than one person in an open relationship) and in certain situations it can work out very well.

But for something like that to work you have to be open about everything, both consent to everything, and (most importantly I think) both be equals in the relationship. What most people think of when they hear about polygamy is the one man with 40 wives who were married off against their will when they were under age. That is by no means the only way to do things, nor is it the best.

The entire idea of polygamy is so complex it is hard to do more than scratch the surface in a short post... but I thought I would at least give the basic idea of it as I understand it.

[Griff]

A lot depends on how many red crayons are in the house.

[xoxoxoBruce]

crayons. But yes, that's the tone I was getting from the article.

I was conjuring up images of Suleyman's harem whenever I heard polygamy. But these woman are talking of a democratically run household of women that have a common husband they use for stud and chores like income and lawn mowing. They're talking like he's a shared pet.

[busterb]

When I was in Sumatra, you could have 4 wives, if #1 gave the ok.
I think this was stared by the fact that no one gave a shit about girl babies. So to survive, and you could support, you could have more that one.

[Elspode]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

. But these woman are talking of a democratically run household of women that have a common husband they use for stud and chores like income and lawn mowing.

How could this be bad? At least you'd have a variety of sex partners, and your duties would essentially be unchanged.

Seriously, though, the vast majority of true poly relationships with which I am familiar work the other way...one woman, multiple male partners.

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Seriously, though, the vast majority of true poly relationships with which I am familiar work the other way...one woman, multiple male partners.

Now, this is where I become interested in the conversation. Would there be any recognized validity in the polygamy argument if it was about multiple husbands or couples and not primarily about multiple wives? I am looking for opinions, here.

[wolf]

And most of you people made fun of Rick Santorum ...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Fun? No, Santorum was no fun.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by wolf

And most of you people made fun of Rick Santorum ...

His nickname was "Senator Man-on-dog", not "Senator Mormon".

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by wolf

And most of you people made fun of Rick Santorum ...

Yeah, but bestiality and incest are still a loooong way down the slippery slope past polygamy.

[9th Engineer]

Way past it in terms of the 'yuck' factor, but what happens once you say that one one has the right to use the yuck factor? A big catch-all which says that as long as no one gets hurt it's ok would catch a hell of alot more than intended.

[Ibby]

I'd say incest, though repulsive in every way, should be comepletely legal.

Bestiality? I say no, because animals can't consent.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Ibram

I'd say incest, though repulsive in every way, should be comepletely legal.

Bestiality? I say no, because animals can't consent.

It already is, in West Virginia. At least with first cousins.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Ibram

I'd say incest, though repulsive in every way, should be comepletely legal.

I'm going to assume you mean the kind between two consenting adult siblings, which almost never happens, and not the parent-child relationships which are the most common, right?