FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swingers Chat > should poly people be allowed to...
should poly people be allowed to...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? " no  | |||
| |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? " That was meant to read is NOW allowed! | |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? " I think that in the modern era, where marriage is seen more as a contract than anything else, that it is a bit ridiculous that we place the restrictions on it that we do. People in that sort of relationship would be able to form any other sort of contract they wanted....just not the marriage contract. That being said, if it ever does happen, I think it won't be for a long time because I also think the entire concept of marriage is going to be outdated soon, anyway. -Courtney | |||
"That was meant to read is NOW allowed! " I guessed that  | |||
"That was meant to read is NOW allowed! I guessed that "Good, i didn't want to be one of those who deletes the original post! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I said a while ago that with the divorce rate what it is and so many people not really taking marriage seriously anymore, soon they'll start doing limited term marriages, where your divorce papers are filed and processed automatically at the end of the term, unless you actively make the effort to renew, lol." That sounds like a great idea! | |||
| |||
| |||
"The bible allowed men to have more than one wife, so why not, it's all love x" Yes, why don't we do everything the Bible allowed?
Does anyone have some extra stones I can borrow?
-Courtney | |||
"The bible allowed men to have more than one wife, so why not, it's all love x Yes, why don't we do everything the Bible allowed?
Does anyone have some extra stones I can borrow?
-Courtney"I hope those stones are not for me, cause I am good at catching, they will be on a return journey back home lol | |||
"The bible allowed men to have more than one wife, so why not, it's all love x Yes, why don't we do everything the Bible allowed?
Does anyone have some extra stones I can borrow?
-Courtney
I hope those stones are not for me, cause I am good at catching, they will be on a return journey back home lol"haha! No! Not for you. I'm just getting my stash built up cuz the Bible seemed keen on stoning people to, so I thought while we were following it in some respects, we could follow it in others as well  | |||
"I said a while ago that with the divorce rate what it is and so many people not really taking marriage seriously anymore, soon they'll start doing limited term marriages, where your divorce papers are filed and processed automatically at the end of the term, unless you actively make the effort to renew, lol. That sounds like a great idea! "marriage has become a little like fab why make the effort if he doesn't, just move onto the next one  | |||
| |||
| |||
"Multiple partners would make the legal sides of marriage very complicated. Let's say man and two wives man gets incapacitated which wife has the right to instruct medical personal on which course of treatment to follow?" It wouldn't be all that complicated. Have the same legal rules you have for non married people, or make new ones (for example, first husband has most legal rights reserved unless wife states differently, etc.). The legal stuff is the easy bit. As I said, just treat it like the contract it is and have the details sorted upon marriage. -Courtney | |||
"Would leave marriage open even more for abuse, spouse benefits, immigration status. Would your boss be happy if you died at work and he had to make your death in service payment to all 15 of your wives, lol?" Would they havebto pay 15 times, or just once? | |||
"The bible allowed men to have more than one wife, so why not, it's all love x" Have you read the Bible? Yes let's follow that and "do not wear clothing of two kinds of material" even if it does make your shirts easier to iron | |||
"I don't really know why people feel marriage is an outdated, dying concept. Fewer people are getting married and staying married, yes, but those who are it's because they really want to. The campaigners for same sex marriage weren't just campaigning on equality grounds, but because some of them actually really wanted to be married. " Yes, I got married because I really wanted to. Buy I still think marriage is a dying concept. It began as a covenant- a religious contract made between two people and god (yes, it does have an older history, but I'm talking about marriage as it is familiar to our society). That covenant has slowly been eroding, more quickly in recent decades. The primary reason why it was kept and incorporated into state laws was either religious devotion (which becomes overrun by gay marriage and polygamous marriage) or to encourage childbearing. These reasons have become more and more outdated in modern society. Add to that the fact that increased rights for women have enhanced the contractual nature of marriage, and you end up in a situation where pre-nups and insurance policies are actually covering more legal ground than an individual's marriage vows. So, as more equality is shared in marriage (for different gender/sex relationships along with women), and as childbearing incentives and religious motivations dissipate (as they have been doing) I personally believe marriage will begin to look more and more like any other contract. Of course the fear is that it begins the look like a sex/financial set up (which it technically is). How we avoid that, I don't know. Sorry for the novel length post, but you asked
-Courtney | |||
"I don't really know why people feel marriage is an outdated, dying concept. Fewer people are getting married and staying married, yes, but those who are it's because they really want to. The campaigners for same sex marriage weren't just campaigning on equality grounds, but because some of them actually really wanted to be married. Yes, I got married because I really wanted to. Buy I still think marriage is a dying concept. It began as a covenant- a religious contract made between two people and god (yes, it does have an older history, but I'm talking about marriage as it is familiar to our society). That covenant has slowly been eroding, more quickly in recent decades. The primary reason why it was kept and incorporated into state laws was either religious devotion (which becomes overrun by gay marriage and polygamous marriage) or to encourage childbearing. These reasons have become more and more outdated in modern society. Add to that the fact that increased rights for women have enhanced the contractual nature of marriage, and you end up in a situation where pre-nups and insurance policies are actually covering more legal ground than an individual's marriage vows. So, as more equality is shared in marriage (for different gender/sex relationships along with women), and as childbearing incentives and religious motivations dissipate (as they have been doing) I personally believe marriage will begin to look more and more like any other contract. Of course the fear is that it begins the look like a sex/financial set up (which it technically is). How we avoid that, I don't know. Sorry for the novel length post, but you asked
-Courtney"I totally understand your point of view Courtney, but from how intetpret your post, you see it as a contact between 2 people, but marriage also gives a huge amount of rights to the spouces and how they are treated by the state, their landlord, military, banks, medical professionals, courts, employers, schools etc. etc. that just dont currently exist with non-married partnerships, or are a lot harder to prove those rights exist. | |||
"I totally understand your point of view Courtney, but from how intetpret your post, you see it as a contact between 2 people, but marriage also gives a huge amount of rights to the spouces and how they are treated by the state, their landlord, military, banks, medical professionals, courts, employers, schools etc. etc. that just dont currently exist with non-married partnerships, or are a lot harder to prove those rights exist. " Right, I agree. But that doesn't make the institution of marriage necessary. All you do is change the laws, follow the difficult path of non-married persons (which many today are doing anyway because lots of our other institutions make marriage redundant), or just be honest and call marriage the contract it is. That way it wouldn't matter who wanted to enter into it so long as they were consenting adults. Which would answer your initial question. -Courtney | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? " Pardon - Same sex marriage is legal and has been for what, a year and a half now? | |||
| |||
| |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? Pardon - Same sex marriage is legal and has been for what, a year and a half now?" If you read higher up she does add that it should've said now instead of not | |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? Pardon - Same sex marriage is legal and has been for what, a year and a half now?" Further reading would show he made a typo and corrected it!! | |||
| |||
"I don't really know why people feel marriage is an outdated, dying concept. Fewer people are getting married and staying married, yes, but those who are it's because they really want to. The campaigners for same sex marriage weren't just campaigning on equality grounds, but because some of them actually really wanted to be married. Yes, I got married because I really wanted to. Buy I still think marriage is a dying concept. It began as a covenant- a religious contract made between two people and god (yes, it does have an older history, but I'm talking about marriage as it is familiar to our society). That covenant has slowly been eroding, more quickly in recent decades. The primary reason why it was kept and incorporated into state laws was either religious devotion (which becomes overrun by gay marriage and polygamous marriage) or to encourage childbearing. These reasons have become more and more outdated in modern society. Add to that the fact that increased rights for women have enhanced the contractual nature of marriage, and you end up in a situation where pre-nups and insurance policies are actually covering more legal ground than an individual's marriage vows. So, as more equality is shared in marriage (for different gender/sex relationships along with women), and as childbearing incentives and religious motivations dissipate (as they have been doing) I personally believe marriage will begin to look more and more like any other contract. Of course the fear is that it begins the look like a sex/financial set up (which it technically is). How we avoid that, I don't know. Sorry for the novel length post, but you asked
-Courtney"Can understand that, but I think marriage has changed and evolved from its origins and, as long as people want it to, will continue to do so to remain relevant and worthwhile. I wanted to be married, with all of what that means to me, I didn't just want a legal contract drawn up setting out my 'rights'. Even if the same legal and contractual type protections are given to unmarried couples, that wouldn't make marriage irrelevant for me. I get why you're coming at it from a legalistic point of view, but this seems to focus particularly on the circumstances of the relationship ending. Even if being married meant I had FEWER rights than an unmarried couple (in some sort of bizarre future) I would still likely get married, because that's not why I got married. I didn't get married to get half his pension or whatever, I have my own. I wouldn't have a pre-nup either though, you either go into it wanting to stay with that person forever and be little old people together one day, or why bother in the first place. I'm not particularly romantic so I don't think I've got some kind of rose-tinted view of it. As long as enough people still want marriage to exist, which I believe they do, then it will remain valid. This has been extended to include same sex couples, and if it can be extended to include poly relationships where people want that, then even better. | |||
| |||
"I don't really know why people feel marriage is an outdated, dying concept. Fewer people are getting married and staying married, yes, but those who are it's because they really want to. The campaigners for same sex marriage weren't just campaigning on equality grounds, but because some of them actually really wanted to be married. Yes, I got married because I really wanted to. Buy I still think marriage is a dying concept. It began as a covenant- a religious contract made between two people and god (yes, it does have an older history, but I'm talking about marriage as it is familiar to our society). That covenant has slowly been eroding, more quickly in recent decades. The primary reason why it was kept and incorporated into state laws was either religious devotion (which becomes overrun by gay marriage and polygamous marriage) or to encourage childbearing. These reasons have become more and more outdated in modern society. Add to that the fact that increased rights for women have enhanced the contractual nature of marriage, and you end up in a situation where pre-nups and insurance policies are actually covering more legal ground than an individual's marriage vows. So, as more equality is shared in marriage (for different gender/sex relationships along with women), and as childbearing incentives and religious motivations dissipate (as they have been doing) I personally believe marriage will begin to look more and more like any other contract. Of course the fear is that it begins the look like a sex/financial set up (which it technically is). How we avoid that, I don't know. Sorry for the novel length post, but you asked
-Courtney
Can understand that, but I think marriage has changed and evolved from its origins and, as long as people want it to, will continue to do so to remain relevant and worthwhile.
I wanted to be married, with all of what that means to me, I didn't just want a legal contract drawn up setting out my 'rights'. Even if the same legal and contractual type protections are given to unmarried couples, that wouldn't make marriage irrelevant for me. I get why you're coming at it from a legalistic point of view, but this seems to focus particularly on the circumstances of the relationship ending. Even if being married meant I had FEWER rights than an unmarried couple (in some sort of bizarre future) I would still likely get married, because that's not why I got married. I didn't get married to get half his pension or whatever, I have my own. I wouldn't have a pre-nup either though, you either go into it wanting to stay with that person forever and be little old people together one day, or why bother in the first place.
I'm not particularly romantic so I don't think I've got some kind of rose-tinted view of it. As long as enough people still want marriage to exist, which I believe they do, then it will remain valid. This has been extended to include same sex couples, and if it can be extended to include poly relationships where people want that, then even better. "We just got married because the US gives a tax break to married couples filing jointly, so romance isn't my motivation
-Courtney | |||
"I don't really know why people feel marriage is an outdated, dying concept. Fewer people are getting married and staying married, yes, but those who are it's because they really want to. The campaigners for same sex marriage weren't just campaigning on equality grounds, but because some of them actually really wanted to be married. Yes, I got married because I really wanted to. Buy I still think marriage is a dying concept. It began as a covenant- a religious contract made between two people and god (yes, it does have an older history, but I'm talking about marriage as it is familiar to our society). That covenant has slowly been eroding, more quickly in recent decades. The primary reason why it was kept and incorporated into state laws was either religious devotion (which becomes overrun by gay marriage and polygamous marriage) or to encourage childbearing. These reasons have become more and more outdated in modern society. Add to that the fact that increased rights for women have enhanced the contractual nature of marriage, and you end up in a situation where pre-nups and insurance policies are actually covering more legal ground than an individual's marriage vows. So, as more equality is shared in marriage (for different gender/sex relationships along with women), and as childbearing incentives and religious motivations dissipate (as they have been doing) I personally believe marriage will begin to look more and more like any other contract. Of course the fear is that it begins the look like a sex/financial set up (which it technically is). How we avoid that, I don't know. Sorry for the novel length post, but you asked
-Courtney
Can understand that, but I think marriage has changed and evolved from its origins and, as long as people want it to, will continue to do so to remain relevant and worthwhile.
I wanted to be married, with all of what that means to me, I didn't just want a legal contract drawn up setting out my 'rights'. Even if the same legal and contractual type protections are given to unmarried couples, that wouldn't make marriage irrelevant for me. I get why you're coming at it from a legalistic point of view, but this seems to focus particularly on the circumstances of the relationship ending. Even if being married meant I had FEWER rights than an unmarried couple (in some sort of bizarre future) I would still likely get married, because that's not why I got married. I didn't get married to get half his pension or whatever, I have my own. I wouldn't have a pre-nup either though, you either go into it wanting to stay with that person forever and be little old people together one day, or why bother in the first place.
I'm not particularly romantic so I don't think I've got some kind of rose-tinted view of it. As long as enough people still want marriage to exist, which I believe they do, then it will remain valid. This has been extended to include same sex couples, and if it can be extended to include poly relationships where people want that, then even better.
We just got married because the US gives a tax break to married couples filing jointly, so romance isn't my motivation
-Courtney" I think I understand why we have different opinions on this then | |||
"It's funny how when people talk about poly they mainly assume it means multiple wives. Women aren't daft... who the fuck would want more than one husband?! "c'mon now women aren't daft guys who believes that one ,god oh and marriage is a contract at the moment it's based on the theory a god exists but as I believe in the process of natural evolution I can't go down that route ,marriage was put in place because humans with their large brains understand the need to have a structured life eat sleep breathe,eat sleep breathe but also because we procreate and have children a family unit to be nurtured by a man and a woman naturally so because only a man and a woman and the natural act of Fucking until you cum can create that child unfortunately humans have twisted nature and ok as a human that understands the need for change and that humans will adapt to their surroundings realises that same sex marriages are evolving for a reason but bearing in mind the divorce rate is spiraling how will the same sex marriages fair one wonders and if by whichever means a child is involved how good will this be for society and its moral values ,I see myself as immoral and I see swingers as immoral as a parent in what was a committed relationship for most of the 21 years it existed I saw myself as moral nurturing my children with the values and experiences that will make them happy and inquisitive in their life to come ,I think society as a whole is losing these values certainly in the western world where anything goes "poly" and " fuck and go emporiums" we are doomed hehe | |||
| |||
"The difference from a legal point may sound like semantics but it does explain why swingers, and those into BDsM (poly to a lesser extent) are still able to be ridiculed in the popular press. The law prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender, not lifestyle choice, which all of the above are considered to be. Therefore, poly would need to be recategorised as a gender to allow people to make a legal point that they could marry multiples. Most poly relationships have a "primary" rand they are likely to be the one with whom their is a marriage. I know someone who is divorcing her original husband, in order to marry another, as he has now become her primary. The ex husband will still be in her circle, just not at the hub of it. " poly has continuously moving boundaries and ideals within it its an inconsistency, that's why it exists how can you categorise something that the people who support it don't want to be restricted by having said that women have constantly changing goal posts and yet we've managed to categorise them ,how the hell did it happen    | |||
"The difference from a legal point may sound like semantics but it does explain why swingers, and those into BDsM (poly to a lesser extent) are still able to be ridiculed in the popular press. The law prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender, not lifestyle choice, which all of the above are considered to be. Therefore, poly would need to be recategorised as a gender to allow people to make a legal point that they could marry multiples. Most poly relationships have a "primary" and they are likely to be the one with whom their is a marriage. I know someone who is divorcing her original husband, in order to marry another, as he has now become her primary. The ex husband will still be in her circle, just not at the hub of it. " I have never heard of anyone categorising poly as a gender before. | |||
| |||
"Get married? Same Sex marriage is not allowed, so should poly marriage be considered? " No marriage should have been reserved for heterosexual couples until civil partnerships were opened up for everyone else including poly relationships. The present position of civil partnerships only being allowed for same sex couples is a form of discrimination against all other forms of relationship. There was an excuse for marriage to be restricted due to the law of the country at the time but to make a new legal form of relationship restricted in the way civil partnerships were was disgusting and shames everyone who supports such a divisive law | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_polygamy | |||
"Multiple partners would make the legal sides of marriage very complicated. Let's say man and two wives man gets incapacitated which wife has the right to instruct medical personal on which course of treatment to follow? It wouldn't be all that complicated. Have the same legal rules you have for non married people, or make new ones (for example, first husband has most legal rights reserved unless wife states differently, etc.). The legal stuff is the easy bit. As I said, just treat it like the contract it is and have the details sorted upon marriage. -Courtney " Well it is complicated . If it's the same as non married people then it's just a title and you can go have a cerimoney right now and call yourself whatever you want why bother the state? Then you got "make new ones" well that's going to take a lot of time to come up with and formalise etc which is a big expense for practically no benifit. | |||
