Polyamory: The Next Sexual Revolution?

[Mark&Steph 0]

If there people are happy with their situation, I say more power to them.

[Fandango 1,439]

"mommy can me and daddys whorze go build a sand castle"

I think you misunderstand the concept.

As interesting a concept as this is. The real truth is that the players are totally self involved. hedonistic. While the good side can multiply by 4, the bad side can also. Instead of 2 egos, there are now 4. The child does not have a core father figure, but then again, many single parent families lack this as well. There is no real challenge of commitment. There is no loyalty. You can try and define it with some new designer term, but bottom line is that it is just another self serving, "look at me" ideology that serves no real purpose in the long run but to complicate life and possibly give a warped value system to the child. But then again, its not about child is it? Its about ME ME ME and ME.

I totally agree. But if that's what they wanna do, then they can go for it afaic.

[Fandango 1,439]

I will add this: I am religious. I lean conservative. Yet, I do think that if one looks at marriage in terms of 'legal partnership' just as one would look at a legal corporation, that it should be available for any consenting adults. People are gonna do whatever they're gonna do anyways, so denying people the right to legally bind their partnerships is stupid.

When I get married, it will be with some sort of religious ceremony because that is what is important to me...but religion doesn't define most legal contracts, it shouldn't define marriage, either.

[NickD 203]

Polyamory has a broad definition, simple as holding a hand to going all the way. Really never gave it much thought, seems customary in Latin America to give my wife's friends a quick hug when saying goodbye, some are darn attractive women, but at least to now, never the magic I feel when I hug my own wife. A damn good reason to marry he. Even here last Saturday night at a bar, the other Latin American women like to give me a quick hug, but noticed my wife avoids most of the USC men with that pleasure if you want to call it that. But this is only once a month.

More custom in this society never to give hugs to associates wives, at most, would bow and kiss the back of their hands, kind of a show thing, washing my mouth afterwards. Latin American women are far more liberal in this respect.

I go a little farther with my own daughter-in-laws, a hug and a kiss on the cheek when saying hello or goodbye, hey they gave me some great grandkids. WPS had a couple of British pyschologists on this morning with the very floor of marriage based on the financial status of the marriage. Poor economic times are causing many breakups. Could be why the USCIS takes such an interest in that phase of the marriage.

Just seems to me, if a couple wants to engage in polyamory, they are not happy with what they have at home and probably shoudn't have gotten married in the first place. But have met women that were very free with their bodies, just figured, if they were free with me, would be free with anybody, not good for a long term relationship. Better for them to remain free and hang out with guys that like to be free. But then they get old, get fat and ugly, don't have any kids, and die lonely. Plenty of those around.

[JVKn'CVO 11]

"shivers at the thought of doing laundry for more than one man*

Saludos,

Caro

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I will add this: I am religious. I lean conservative. Yet, I do think that if one looks at marriage in terms of 'legal partnership' just as one would look at a legal corporation, that it should be available for any consenting adults. People are gonna do whatever they're gonna do anyways, so denying people the right to legally bind their partnerships is stupid.

When I get married, it will be with some sort of religious ceremony because that is what is important to me...but religion doesn't define most legal contracts, it shouldn't define marriage, either.

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc. The only way it would be remotely realistic is for each partnership to be its own unique contract - with such issues predefined prior to entering into it. Of course you still couldn't really do it without siginificantly changing some areas of law - and that would create some spectacularly complex divorce cases (i.e. years in court)

The other problem with permitting this is exactly who would use it. As I see it - the only people this would really benefit would be dodgy religious cults who are doing this sort of stuff already with underage girls, or those who are coerced.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

"shivers at the thought of doing laundry for more than one man*

Saludos,

Caro

[Fandango 1,439]

I will add this: I am religious. I lean conservative. Yet, I do think that if one looks at marriage in terms of 'legal partnership' just as one would look at a legal corporation, that it should be available for any consenting adults. People are gonna do whatever they're gonna do anyways, so denying people the right to legally bind their partnerships is stupid.

When I get married, it will be with some sort of religious ceremony because that is what is important to me...but religion doesn't define most legal contracts, it shouldn't define marriage, either.

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc. The only way it would be remotely realistic is for each partnership to be its own unique contract - with such issues predefined prior to entering into it. Of course you still couldn't really do it without siginificantly changing some areas of law - and that would create some spectacularly complex divorce cases (i.e. years in court)

The other problem with permitting this is exactly who would use it. As I see it - the only people this would really benefit would be dodgy religious cults who are doing this sort of stuff already with underage girls, or those who are coerced.

I'm not quite sure, but how would you go about a business partnership comprised of 6 investors? As to the child issues, they would be between the bio mom and dad, I guess. I'm not saying it would be easy or simple by any means, but at the end of the day, they're already doing it so what's the real diff?

[NickD 203]

I will add this: I am religious. I lean conservative. Yet, I do think that if one looks at marriage in terms of 'legal partnership' just as one would look at a legal corporation, that it should be available for any consenting adults. People are gonna do whatever they're gonna do anyways, so denying people the right to legally bind their partnerships is stupid.

When I get married, it will be with some sort of religious ceremony because that is what is important to me...but religion doesn't define most legal contracts, it shouldn't define marriage, either.

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc. The only way it would be remotely realistic is for each partnership to be its own unique contract - with such issues predefined prior to entering into it. Of course you still couldn't really do it without siginificantly changing some areas of law - and that would create some spectacularly complex divorce cases (i.e. years in court)

The other problem with permitting this is exactly who would use it. As I see it - the only people this would really benefit would be dodgy religious cults who are doing this sort of stuff already with underage girls, or those who are coerced.

I'm not quite sure, but how would you go about a business partnership comprised of 6 investors? As to the child issues, they would be between the bio mom and dad, I guess. I'm not saying it would be easy or simple by any means, but at the end of the day, they're already doing it so what's the real diff?

Not fair to the man either, generally, and I use that word loosely, a man is only good for 50 times a day where a woman can do it over a hundred times.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The difference lies in the degree to which existing laws would need to be changed to facilitate it.

Perhaps this may happen in the future, but for today it isn't what's on the table - and the only reason things like this are seized upon is as a cynical argument against gay marriage.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

"shivers at the thought of doing laundry for more than one man*

Saludos,

Caro

Caro needs to attend Len's School of Wifely Emancipation .... no such thing as doing the laundry

[mawilson 2,133]

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc.

Same way you would a 2-way partnership, only divide everything by 6 instead of 2.

I'm not quite sure, but how would you go about a business partnership comprised of 6 investors?

Exactly. No big deal.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc.

Same way you would a 2-way partnership, only divide everything by 6 instead of 2.

It will do one thing certainly - it will be open season for divorce lawyers.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc.

Same way you would a 2-way partnership, only divide everything by 6 instead of 2.

It will do one thing certainly - it will be open season for divorce lawyers.

As opposed to today???

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How do you legally bind a 6 way partnership though? How do you even begin to address things like child support, child custody, taxation, inheritances etc etc.

Same way you would a 2-way partnership, only divide everything by 6 instead of 2.

It will do one thing certainly - it will be open season for divorce lawyers.

As opposed to today???

x10

I mean, can you imagine - a lawyer for each partner...

Edited July 31, 2009 by Private Pike