Celritannia wrote:It does get annoying when the only sources people against polyamorous marriages are ones relating to Polygamy. Unrelated to say the least.
Polygamy and Polyamory have differences.
Yes, paper work.
Celritannia wrote:Society will not end if polyamory relationships are able to marry.
If you marry more than one person, your polyamory becomes polygamy because polygamy is simply defined as marrying multiple persons.
Celritannia wrote:And to use underage marriages as a way to say consenting adults should not be able to marry who they love is pathetic to say the least.
No, it's not.
Celritannia wrote:As for men in their 20s committing more crimes, this also depends on socio-economic problems, not just being able to marry.
And again, you cannot force women to marry men to stop crime rates.
Large groups of young men not being able to marry and have families is a significant socioeconomic problem and my suggestion wasn't that we should force women to do anything. We should simply prevent anyone from engaging with social models that we know to be exceedingly harmful in other societies when the conditions in our society ensure that they will be harmful here.
Celritannia wrote:And what of Lesbian relationships? Would they not be contradictory to stopping male crime rates?
Homosexuality is somewhat contained by limited genetic predispositions towards it. We have no real evidence to suggest that same-sex marriage will become ubiquitous and, even in societies where it was legal in the past, we didn't have large-scale participation in it as a social model. Again, the issue isn't that some people are polyamorous. It's that, when widely practiced as a social model, polyamory and polygamy, which is just polyamory with paper work, are harmful. And its prevalence won't be curtailed by genetic predispositions like same-sex attraction is. Powerful men will form harems or will marry their mistresses.
Celritannia wrote:If you are against polyamorous relationships to stop men committing crimes, then you should also be against Lesbian marriages.
See above. Please stop trying to knock down other people's sand castles on very flimsy grounds. This isn't about the lesbians. They unironically have done nothing wrong here. You lot, on the other hand, have been very naughty.
Celritannia wrote:As for this ludicrous statement that it helps the patriarchy, this is just wrong. Polyamorous relationship have so many variables, and do not tend to be more than 4 people.
Then provide empirical evidence that it doesn't reinforce patriarchy in patriarchal societies. A single man having three wives is still a problem if we're talking about two or three percent of men in a society.
Celritannia wrote:A polygamy marriage tends to have one sex marrying multiple people the opposite sex and is almost always heterosexual, not the same as polyamorous relationships.
You should stop making your own definitions for terms and consider perhaps that you're the minority when it comes to polyamory given that, statistically, you are the minority - both globally and in the West. You're not the only person trying to have multiple spouses. And most of the people who will benefit from the government letting people like you have multiple spouses are patriarchs - Mormon fundamentalists, immigrants from countries where polygyny is a norm, wealthy businessmen, athletes, and rappers, etc. The social harm, even if contained to certain communities in Utah and Michigan, outweighs the benefits.