Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 9 months ago
    Is this something for Objectivist to care about? We just had a discussion of AR's affairs and not many seemed to denigrate her for that experience. What individuals do consensually amongst themselves is absolutely none of my business nor concern. I might frown when some guy wants to marry a chicken, but in all reality, I care less.

    Marriage is nothing more than a contract between two individuals.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 9 months ago
      are we not exploring and enjoying the parameters

      of interpersonal relations in an objectivist society?

      this seems healthy and free, to me!!! -- j

      .
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 9 months ago
        Why would an Objectivist society place restrictions on consensual contracts between individuals, either legal, moral, or societal?

        Considering such or criticizing others' decisions is not Objectivist. It's being nosy and puritanical.

        Interpersonal relations in an Objectivist society are none of my business, other than my own, and society has no rights.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 8 years, 9 months ago
    So long as it is between consenting adults and not female children and old farts( like me LOL), it is no ones business but the consenting adults. It is especially Not the business of the nanny state.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 8 years, 9 months ago
    That didn't take long now, did it.

    Now, let's consider a scenario. Let's say there are ten bar buddies. One works down at the mill, the rest are self employed. Over a few beers one night, they decide that they and their current wives will all get married to each other. The next morning, the one guy walks into the personnel office down at the mill and announces that the company now has an obligation regarding health insurance for his family.

    What now?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jlc 8 years, 9 months ago
      I would first suggest looking at how private insurers deal with polygamous marriages in, say, India or in Hong Kong. (I remember in Hong Kong there was a big luxury building that had a separate floor for each of the man's wives.)

      The problem of how to solve insurance for plural marriages has probably already been dealt with by insurance companies.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 8 months ago
        undoubtedly as that type of arrangement is more prevalent than the one and one type. With one and one the one stayed home and minded the family, house and kitchen garden. The other worked to obtain local currency to pay for other needs including taxes. Two halves made a whole. Now it takes one to pay the taxes, one to pay the bills and one to mind the home unless you just abandon the children to the school districts and a latch key.Finally when ends don't meet one or the other or both quit. But then we have high school kids getting up at four am and getting to bed at ten or eleven or midnight to accommodate academics, extra curricular activities and part time jobs. The same group refers to their first marriage as starter marriages. and many of the young women readily admit they expect it will take two or three to make enough retirement money. Ergo sum? 60% plus divorce and separation rate and increases in dysfunctional families. I would think polygamy wouldn't work in the USA due to basic cultural differences amongst them a distinct lack of moral values other than the fool your neighbor variety. Not so elsewhere. On the other hand Hong Kong has one particular street full of night clubs and pick up bars where ...single guys heaven. Mostly day time secretaries and so forth looking for a few extras in life and most of them from Malaysia right across the causeway.

        Anywhere you find Uncle Sam's presence there is an American Alley. Uncle Sam is one of if not the world's largest providers of customers for the seamier side - in light of all that I see no problem with voluntary relationships of any type between consenting adults - if they work. The current system has not done so. if it's good for two ganders it's good for one gander and the geese. The time for spouting hypocritical moral systems is gone - as a nation. especially one that votes for the likes of Bill and Hillary.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 8 years, 9 months ago
    I think the government should just back off and let the man do what he wants, period. What's someone that goes both ways today supposed to do? Would it not be better for them to have one of each? If there was no opposition to polygamy and it was legal I really doubt there would be very many that would actually go through with it. Could you imagine dealing with two wives or two husbands, hell one's more than enough. Just because we don't believe in something doesn't mean we should ban it, especially if it doesn't effect us. Let those that want to experiment suffer in their own misery, or reap the benefits of their desires. I only ask, please don't do it in public, and not in my house.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by SaltyDog 8 years, 9 months ago
      The problem is that government has insidiously inserted itself into the lives of ordinary citizens to the point that anything it does anymore sends a kaleidoscope of regulatory effects spinning out of control, and hey can't just simply butt out (even if they wanted to) without causing negative outcomes. And this, to their way of thinking, requires more new, unwanted intrusions.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 8 years, 9 months ago
    Plural Marriage (aka polygamy) has been going on in Montana (and a LOT of other states, BTW) for well over a century. Other than they want to live openly - which is about damn time the dotgov got out of the "family reguation business" - it shouldn't even be news.

    Drives me CRAZY that people have to live their lives according to the PC notion that we must all bend to the lowest common denominator of they which get their panties in a bunch!! ANd that people get in an uproar when someone follows their own sensibilities rather than that of those in the uproar.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by TheRealBill 8 years, 9 months ago
    If you look at the legal aspect of it, his marriages would still be "a union between one man and one woman" - he would just have a pair of those unions. No refining here.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ winterwind 8 years, 8 months ago
    Who's read enough Heinlein to comment on line marriage and other types of group marriage he presents?

    Line marriage just makes so much SENSE to me - it's almost like a company in that there always remains someone to look after the business, and a business which can endure 100 years under the same management is a desirable thing.


    I'm not sure where I am now, after 40 years of marriage, about the jealousy thing.....except that I can't get to sleep without some high-class cuddling - and he has a tough time, too.

    I think you cold lose yourself In the mechanics, especially since the legality, morality, religious aspects [I think that's all] are moot to us.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ChuckyBob 8 years, 9 months ago
    There is actually a way that legalizing plural marriage could work out well for the government. There are some polygamist groups that encourage the later wives to file for Aid to Mothers with Dependant Children because, in the eyes of the law, the mothers are unwed mothers. So, if they were legally married it would cut off that additional source of recenue for the family and reduce the drain on the government.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Danno 8 years, 9 months ago
    Yes, and I want to marry my dog then get more puppies and get a per puppy tax creidt as long as they live with us and subsidies for dog healthcare too.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by UncommonSense 8 years, 9 months ago
    I guess if this guy likes having TWO women pissed off at him versus only one then more power to him. Personally, hell no.

    One is a enough: one woman, one marriage and if things don't work out in the end, one divorce.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by TheRealBill 8 years, 9 months ago
      Funny thing is, from what I hear via those in the know is that one women tends to calm the other down. Sounds counterintuitive but that's what I hear. Perhaps because it might take more understanding for such an arrangement to work those involved have more practice at being less angry over stupid things.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 8 years, 9 months ago
        well I am a woman and I can tell you, women tend to wind each other up. "you go girl!" comes to mind...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by TheRealBill 8 years, 8 months ago
          Sure, but in the context of a polyamorous situation? It's one thing to encourage a friend to "go girl" on her man when you have her story, another when you are intimate with him as yours as well.

          Or so I'm told. But it makes sense to me, and these people seem to make it work.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo