forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

I have a little bit of second hand experience with polygamy. I live in Utah, a state pretty much ruled by the LDS church. There's an offshoot of the mainstream LDS church, called the FLDS church. The F stands for fundamentalist, because these people kept the custom of polygamy that was rooted in the original church. Modern LDS people, or Mormons, don't practice polygamy, and they've removed it from their doctrine.

The FLDS communities usually stay in tight knit farms or entire towns, and they aren't kind to outsiders. Polygamy is a minor infraction in this state. That's not really what FLDS people are worried about. They keep such tight knit, secretive communities because, often, 40 year old men are marrying

16 year old girls. It's technically a legal marriage, with the parent's consent, but what about the 16 year old? What about the 15 year old, the 17, 18, and even 14 year old? They don't really have any say. Their fathers give them a few grown men to choose from, and they have to marry one of them. They're forced to marry. Often, they're marrying a middle aged man who already has 7 wives and 35 kids. These people can't provide for their families.

My teacher used to teach a child of polygamy. These kids are tiny. The families simply don't have enough money to feed their kids. They don't have the time to spend with their wives and kids. There are a few polygamist families on the outskirts of my town. Their houses are as big as they can afford, for so many people. From the outside, it doesn't look sanitary. I'm not attacking them personally for not being able to clean up and feed their kids, I'm sure they're trying their best. But it's obvious their life style is not healthy or practical. It's a breeding ground for abuse, neglect, financial struggles, and starvation

. I have a lot of problems with the FLDS church, it's obvious. But they use polygamy as the main tool to maintain their power. They weaken families so they rely on the church. They stay in their communities. They obey the leaders, because they have nowhere else to go- not with so many kids, not with so many wives.

I personally think it's immoral, but beyond that, there's nothing good I can pick out, objectively. I'm a strong believer in the first amendment, so these people have a right to practice their religion. I don't want to take that away from them. But for God's sake, there are whole organizations devoted to sneaking people put of polygamous cults and families. People are being hurt, abused traumatized, and it all ties back to polygamy. Hell, there's a whole TV show about it. Something has to be done, without infringing on their freedom of religion. It's tricky to figure out what.

When it comes to polyamory, I also personally find it to be immoral. I agree with Emi, it's dysfunctional. It's impractical. I don't think people have the capability to love more than one person in a healthy, devoted, romantic/sexual relationship. I think it'll only result in pain, to all people involved. If it's consenting and legal, there's nothing I can do about it. It's if my personal opinion that it's wrong, but that doesnt mean I'll go tell a polyamorous person how to live their life. That's their business.

(*hear)

Crap!

just a thought but maybe you aren't in love with any of them and you have some things to work out before you throw yourself into relationships.

^^^

Okay but guys . . . polyamory is a legitimate thing. Like some people are literally capable of loving multiple people. Sometimes it's multiple people that all love each other, sometimes its two people and either one or both of them also love another person. The important thing is that it's always consenting. But it is a real thing. Just because you would never feel like that doesn't mean its real.

That would be like me saying homosexuality or pansexuality or asexuality or aromanticism isn't real just because I don't experience those things.

Though, while we're waiting for the response. Dom, why do you believe it to be dumb and immoral?

Honestly it's easier to say dumb than immoral so I'll do that. Relationships are crazy difficult things (both). Maintaining balance between two people is hard business that people don't know how to do or won't. (Kid's these days, y'know?) Throwing another person in there make it three times as hard. And four people would make it 9x hard while a O/O relationship would be 2x hard.

I can kind of see having a threesome to spice up your sex life or whatever even though that's still weird and icky, but if you can't pick or you think you're in love with more than one person or whatever,

Ew. Yuck.

just a thought but maybe you aren't in love with any of them and you have some things to work out before you throw yourself into relationships.

Pickles knows what's up once again.

Okay but guys . . . polyamory is a legitimate thing. Like some people are literally capable of loving multiple people. Sometimes it's multiple people that all love each other, sometimes its two people and either one or both of them also love another person. The important thing is that it's always consenting. But it is a real thing. Just because you would never feel like that doesn't mean its real.

I mean… how can you be sure?

I don't know if I really believe it's real. And maybe that's because I'm not poly. But if I had to be honest, I'd say that I personally believe, like I said, that you should be in a relationship with one person. That's what being in a relationship is about: Two people who love each other. I just think it should be two people. And as I said, I don't know whether or not I agree with whether or not it's a 'real thing.'

I don't know if I really believe it's real. And maybe that's because I'm not poly. But if I had to be honest, I'd say that I personally believe, like I said, that you should be in a relationship with one person. That's what being in a relationship is about: Two people who love each other. I just think it should be two people. And as I said, I don't know whether or not I agree with whether or not it's a 'real thing.'

However, who's to say that a relationship should just be two? I say that if it's consensual, everyone involved is happy, and it is truly love, then it is perfectly fine. I don't think that a relationship should be painted as the wall as two people who love each other. I feel like that's kind of in the same boat as saying a relationship should be between a boy and a girl. I just think it's denying people's feelings or love because your ideals don't match it.

That's my opinion though.

Okay but guys . . . polyamory is a legitimate thing. Like some people are literally capable of loving multiple people. Sometimes it's multiple people that all love each other, sometimes its two people and either one or both of them also love another person. The important thing is that it's always consenting. But it is a real thing. Just because you would never feel like that doesn't mean its real.

I mean… how can you be sure?

You can prove people experience sexual attraction to certain genders. You can prove people lack attraction. You can prove people can only experience attraction under specific circumstances. There are brain scans for that. But you can't prove people have the capability to maintain a healthy relationship with more than one person. I think wanting to be in a multi-relationship is a very real want. That doesn't make it an actual orientation or a realistic and healthy relationship status.

Okay but guys . . . polyamory is a legitimate thing. Like some people are literally capable of loving multiple people. Sometimes it's multiple people that all love each other, sometimes its two people and either one or both of them also love another person. The important thing is that it's always consenting. But it is a real thing. Just because you would never feel like that doesn't mean its real.

Right, it’s always consenting, that’s fine.

But what if polyamory isn’t consenting? What if you find yourself in a situation that you’re with a poly individual? A lot more people are living that life right now, and I’m extremely unhappy to say it, but I think a lot of cold-blooded cheaters are hiding behind being poly.

I don’t doubt it’s possible. Love is made. Love is strived for in a relation and it’s made by your own hands with the person you have those raw, passionate feelings for.

I can’t imagine, even begin to, loving someone as much as I do Nate. I worked for that, I still am, and it’s an early relationship. Both of us did, we’ve had these feelings for so long, and now we have this chance to make it something. I can’t (again) imagine doing it again while in a relationship. It’s too difficult.

A second person being thrown into a relationship would be hard, and I almost had to deal with that. That is a situation I found myself in. I found myself in an unconsenting poly relationship, unable to figure it out due to lack of tech and seeing the other person.

I don’t mean to bring my personal life into it, but it’s import to make my point.

Having one boyfriend is a fucking pain in the ass, having two would drive me over the edge
okay yes I realize I say this as someone who only had a boyfriend because I thought I was supposed to, but I think I'd still feel this way regardless

You can prove people experience sexual attraction to certain genders. You can prove people lack attraction. You can prove people can only experience attraction under specific circumstances. There are brain scans for that. But you can't prove people have the capability to maintain a healthy relationship with more than one person. I think wanting to be in a multi-relationship is a very real want. That doesn't make it an actual orientation or a realistic and healthy relationship status.

Was the brain scan thing for that, or all of it? Because as a not really homophobe, a brain scan to detect The Gay would be… most intriguing.

However, who's to say that a relationship should just be two? I say that if it's consensual, everyone involved is happy, and it is truly love, then it is perfectly fine. I don't think that a relationship should be painted as the wall as two people who love each other. I feel like that's kind of in the same boat as saying a relationship should be between a boy and a girl. I just think it's denying people's feelings or love because your ideals don't match it.

And what is that?

A second person being thrown into a relationship would be hard, and I almost had to deal with that. That is a situation I found myself in. I found myself in an unconsenting poly relationship, unable to figure it out due to lack of tech and seeing the other person.

I don’t mean to bring my personal life into it, but it’s import to make my point.

Personal tales are always good. Firsthand experience is worthy to be looked upon.

You can prove people experience sexual attraction to certain genders. You can prove people lack attraction. You can prove people can only experience attraction under specific circumstances. There are brain scans for that. But you can't prove people have the capability to maintain a healthy relationship with more than one person. I think wanting to be in a multi-relationship is a very real want. That doesn't make it an actual orientation or a realistic and healthy relationship status.

Was the brain scan thing for that, or all of it? Because as a not really homophobe, a brain scan to detect The Gay would be… most intriguing.

Imagine showing a gay man pictures of attractive men during a brain scan. Certain parts of the brain responsible for feelings of sexual tension, pleasure, and libido would light up.
So yes, brain scans can detect The Gay.
Someone has probably done it.

However, who's to say that a relationship should just be two? I say that if it's consensual, everyone involved is happy, and it is truly love, then it is perfectly fine. I don't think that a relationship should be painted as the wall as two people who love each other. I feel like that's kind of in the same boat as saying a relationship should be between a boy and a girl. I just think it's denying people's feelings or love because your ideals don't match it.

And what is that?

That is a question I cannot answer. Love is different to everyone. What I feel to be love may not be to someone else. Love is a universal feeling, but without a universal definition. Sure, you can look it up in the dictionary, but it's all about what it means to you.

Don't expect too much from me, btw. I am no debater.

However, who's to say that a relationship should just be two? I say that if it's consensual, everyone involved is happy, and it is truly love, then it is perfectly fine. I don't think that a relationship should be painted as the wall as two people who love each other. I feel like that's kind of in the same boat as saying a relationship should be between a boy and a girl. I just think it's denying people's feelings or love because your ideals don't match it.

And what is that?

That is a question I cannot answer. Love is different to everyone. What I feel to be love may not be to someone else. Love is a universal feeling, but without a universal definition. Sure, you can look it up in the dictionary, but it's all about what it means to you.

Don't expect too much from me, btw. I am no debater.

But
You can look it up in the dictionary
A place with definitions
So it does have a "universal definition"
And besides all that, there are plenty of things describing love and it's all basically the same.

But
You can look it up in the dictionary
A place with definitions
So it does have a "universal definition"
And besides all that, there are plenty of things describing love and it's all basically the same.

But is it really a universal definition? Think about it this way, not everyone sees the world the same. So not everyone is bound to see the word love the same. Sure, it's in a book that is meant to define everything as a plain black and white, no exceptions type thing. But really, love is a hard thing to put a face on. For some people, it may not be the "attraction based on sexual desire : affection and tenderness felt by lovers". One of the many definitions written in the Merriam-Webster dictionary. What I'm saying is that what love is what you make of it. Not everybody thinks of love the same. Some people think that two people of the same sex being together isn't love and that it's just mental illness or something done wrong.

My rambling might just be becoming nonsensical, so I think I'll back off now.

Having one boyfriend is a fucking pain in the ass, having two would drive me over the edge

like, it’s just this lmao

And besides all that, there are plenty of things describing love and it's all basically the same.

My rambling might just be becoming nonsensical, so I think I'll back off now.

Having one boyfriend is a fucking pain in the ass, having two would drive me over the edge

like, it’s just this lmao

Also my fear of people liking someone else more than me cannot handle my boyfriend having another girlfriend
_{it can't handle the idea that he would like someone else and only be going to homecoming with me because no one else would go with him and he needed a date, despite the fact that those were my reasons for going with him but let's ignore that because this isn't therapy}

And besides all that, there are plenty of things describing love and it's all basically the same.

I mean, Nie's definitions were very separate. One was lust. The other was "that fluttery feeling" that lovers have.
Neither of which are love.
Love is making a commitment to someone to be there for them. It is to care for that person's goodwill, even if it means saying or doing things that they don't like, because you care for them.
(All of them, as opposed to lust which is interested mainly in one thing or that single thing. Or as opposed to those that chase the feeling and don't do anything to break the glorious "being in love emotion".)