I think you guys are trying to carry this topic way too far. Why would any of you be concerned about what other people do with their relationships or care one way or the other? You are all supposedly Objectivist. Start acting like it or check your premises.

The real issue is not the marriage contract, religious or civil, but sexual relations. The governing rule should be that no sexual relationship is lawful if all parties involved aren't consenting adult humans. Multiple forms of out of the ordinary marital arrangements, such as polygyny, polyandry, communal marital "families" with both multiple male and female participants, and even adult incest should be legal. No tax advantage should result from any marital arrangement.

Since animals and children are not capable of giving adult, advised consent, pedophelia and bestiality both should be criminal activities.

Polygamy, Bestiality and Legalized Pedophilia it is only a matter of time.

Polygamy, or whatever else, must be the "business" of one who speaks for the children.

Rand didn't have much to say about children, and the treatment of children in the eyes of the law. The Gulch was small--small enough that the only children in it were those in typical families. I doubt Rand would have approved of polygamy, much less tried to write a comprehensive set of laws governing who takes responsibility for children.

In the Gulch the solution was easy: nobody got in who was irresponsible toward children. (One family came in precisely because they found the Gulch the best possible place to raise two self-confident boys.) But Galt would never have opened his community up to the kind of shenanigans we see today.

Polygamy, furthermore, diminishes the worth of the gender represented in plurality.It also threatens civil war. Face it: the most common form of polygamy you'll ever see is polygyny--note the extra y and n. Polygamy means "many spouses." Polygyny specifically means "one husband, many wives." (In contrast, polyandry means "one wife, many husbands.") What happens when one man may legally marry more than one women? That leaves certain other men out. Men get so desperate to redress the left-out state that they will kill to do it. You might as well host mortal gladiatorial combats to thin out the ranks of men, so the men left over could enjoy the society of more than one woman each.

Even Nathaniel Branden did not plump for polygyny or polygamy. He offered serial monogamy--one-on-one at any given time.

Best insight here: "...it seems some people go out of their way to misunderstand. " Thanks, Esceptico. Good reminder for when the social media starts moving through multiple levels of irrationality. As far as the question goes, it seems inevitable and will give the liberals another thing to have parades about.

Absolutely. One step closer to eventual acceptance of Sharia. The liberals are already getting excited!

Relationships should not be a government issue, but between the consenting adults. Therefore, I am not clear if the question is vis-a-vis government or simply what, absent government, what do I think of it. If the latter, it is none of my business so long there is an absence of force or fraud.

It could be, like dogs, it is easier to have two or more than one because they entertain each other. Now, before you feminists get your amygdalas in knots, I am joking. I say this because it seems some people go out of their way to misunderstand.

I think if people want to slog that hard row, we shouldn't get in their way. Jus till any other personal issue between consenting adults.

I don't have a problem in principle with multiple wives and husbands. I do object to situations where 16-year-old girls are being forced to marry guys older than their grandfather.

My husband announced to me that we were going to move to Utah and he was going to start collecting wives.
My reply was: "GOOD! I could use a wife-or-two!"

It's already here:

http://www.ktvq.com/story/29447007/lockw...

i fail to see the problem of some people wanting to be part of a group that has no problem with each of the others having sex with the same person when ever they want. i see no problem with some who chose to have sex with the same sex as they are. The problem i do see is that the g o v e r n m e n t wants control over ALL OF US and therefore the government will do anything and everything it can to accommodate as many as possible of trying to be all things to one and all. just like wanting the government to leave us alone in business they have to leave us alone in out private lives. polygamy doesn't exist today as the mormons just live together as a group and only one couple is married.

What about one of each gender?

Probably correct and bestiality is next....but you have to be a masochist to want more than one wife!

All this gay marriage thing is, is a jobs program for attorneys. Homosexuals have more interpersonal problems, spats and breakups that do hetros. The divorces are going to be ugly, expensive and potentially violent.