Somerville, Mass to recognize polyamorous partnerships

[Kannap]

I'm not polyamorous, but cool news for those who are.

[Celritannia]

IT depends what the people involved want to get out of the relationship and what they put in the contract.

Marriage is not a private contract, it is a social contract. The people in the marriage don't decide the conditions for it unless they have a prenuptial and even then those are not legally binding.

A social contract involving the private lives of 2 people.
A prenupital depends on which country you are in. In the UK, there is no such thing.

This example does not include other citizens of the nation.

[Diopolis]

Notably, all three of those things include people who are not, by the way, getting divorced/married or buried as major parts.

Yes, but only include the parties involved, not every Tom, Dick, Harry.

And yet we as a society have declared that they have exactly as much say as every passing Tom, Dick, and Harry.

[Celritannia]

What do I have to gain from knowing the private lives of people 4 doors down from me?

If it were just that, that would be well and good, but that is not the question we must ask. What we must ask is "what do I have to gain and lose from public behavior?"

Marriage and relationship norms are not a private affair just as commerce is not a private affair and just as government policy is not a private affair. My actions affect you and your actions affect me. The only way to resolve this conflict of interests is to have as many members of society as possible agree to specifically laid out social conditions (the social contract) and to put sanctions against the few who do not abide to these social conditions.

Again, their public behaviours will happen when in public. Not in the privacy of their own homes. And even then, as long as they follow the law like everyone else, why should I care?

Your actions hardly affect me when I am not near you, or talking to you.

OR how about just leave it to the people who are establishing a social contract for their private lives?

[Punished UMN]

Marriage is not a private contract, it is a social contract. The people in the marriage don't decide the conditions for it unless they have a prenuptial and even then those are not legally binding.

A social contract involving the private lives of 2 people.
A prenupital depends on which country you are in. In the UK, there is no such thing.

This example does not include other citizens of the nation.

Marriage is not just about private life. The government has a vested interest in regulating it because it involves commerce, reproduction, socialization, etc.

[Punished UMN]

If it were just that, that would be well and good, but that is not the question we must ask. What we must ask is "what do I have to gain and lose from public behavior?"

Marriage and relationship norms are not a private affair just as commerce is not a private affair and just as government policy is not a private affair. My actions affect you and your actions affect me. The only way to resolve this conflict of interests is to have as many members of society as possible agree to specifically laid out social conditions (the social contract) and to put sanctions against the few who do not abide to these social conditions.

Again, their public behaviours will happen when in public. Not in the privacy of their own homes. And even then, as long as they follow the law like everyone else, why should I care?

Your actions hardly affect me when I am not near you, or talking to you.

If everyone or even a multitude of people acted as I do, they would affect you though.

[Celritannia]

A social contract involving the private lives of 2 people.
A prenupital depends on which country you are in. In the UK, there is no such thing.

This example does not include other citizens of the nation.

Marriage is not just about private life. The government has a vested interest in regulating it because it involves commerce, reproduction, socialization, etc.

No, it's the people requesting the government involvement.
But that's between the people marrying and the government. Not me, not you, nor the other 7.8 billion people on Earth.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Your actions hardly affect me when I am not near you, or talking to you.

This just plainly fails to understand how society works. I might not be near to or talking to someone in New York several thousand miles away but their actions absolutely can and do affect me.

[Punished UMN]

Marriage is not just about private life. The government has a vested interest in regulating it because it involves commerce, reproduction, socialization, etc.

No, it's the people requesting the government involvement.
But that's between the people marrying and the government. Not me, not you, nor the other 7.8 billion people on Earth.

If it is between the people marrying and the government, it involves me and all other citizens of the country, because the government represents my interests.

[Celritannia]

Again, their public behaviours will happen when in public. Not in the privacy of their own homes. And even then, as long as they follow the law like everyone else, why should I care?

Your actions hardly affect me when I am not near you, or talking to you.

If everyone or even a multitude of people acted as I do, they would affect you though.

Acted how? I see no reason to involve myself with anyone unless they either ask for my assistance, or I saw they were in need of help in public to which I would try and do what I could.

[Diopolis]

Marriage is not just about private life. The government has a vested interest in regulating it because it involves commerce, reproduction, socialization, etc.

No, it's the people requesting the government involvement.
But that's between the people marrying and the government. Not me, not you, nor the other 7.8 billion people on Earth.

There can only be one societal default. Whether it's my preferred or your preferred is a zero sum game.

[Celritannia]

No, it's the people requesting the government involvement.
But that's between the people marrying and the government. Not me, not you, nor the other 7.8 billion people on Earth.

If it is between the people marrying and the government, it involves me and all other citizens of the country, because the government represents my interests.

Are you going to go to every single marriage that happens on a daily basis in the US?
And what would you get out of this?

[The Reformed American Republic]

Depends who was married to who.
If it was one person married to 2 people, then only one person gets divorced.

If 3 people were jointly married, then it would be a mess.
But I still support these marriages regardless, since the private lives of these people do not concern me.

Private lives of all citizens concern all other citizens.

It would probably be harmful to women and cause more scorn etc. I see no reason why this should be legalized.

[Punished UMN]

If it is between the people marrying and the government, it involves me and all other citizens of the country, because the government represents my interests.

Are you going to go to every single marriage that happens on a daily basis in the US?
And what would you get out of this?

No, that's what the government is for.
I get a society that represents my interests better. Stop using ancapistan logic.

[Celritannia]

No, it's the people requesting the government involvement.
But that's between the people marrying and the government. Not me, not you, nor the other 7.8 billion people on Earth.

There can only be one societal default. Whether it's my preferred or your preferred is a zero sum game.

And if the law changes to involve Polyamory marriages, like in this case, it does not involve anyone here.

[Diopolis]

There can only be one societal default. Whether it's my preferred or your preferred is a zero sum game.

And if the law changes to involve Polyamory marriages, like in this case, it does not involve anyone here.

What's with this PMC liberalism? Actually answer an argument.

[Celritannia]

Are you going to go to every single marriage that happens on a daily basis in the US?
And what would you get out of this?

No, that's what the government is for.
I get a society that represents my interests better. Stop using ancapistan logic.

I am not using ancap logic.
I too elect my Parliament, but the private lives of individuals do not concern me.

[Washington Resistance Army]

There can only be one societal default. Whether it's my preferred or your preferred is a zero sum game.

And if the law changes to involve Polyamory marriages, like in this case, it does not involve anyone here.

But it does, because under accepted liberal social theory the US is a patriarchal nation and legal poly will inherently come to favor high class men to the detriment of everyone else, which causes social tension.

[Celritannia]

And if the law changes to involve Polyamory marriages, like in this case, it does not involve anyone here.

What's with this PMC liberalism? Actually answer an argument.

I am answering an argument. I see no reason why individuals need to concern themselves with the marriages of private citizens.

[Punished UMN]

No, that's what the government is for.
I get a society that represents my interests better. Stop using ancapistan logic.

I am not using ancap logic.
I too elect my Parliament, but the private lives of individuals do not concern me.

Marriage and social interaction more generally is not the private life of an individual.

[Alcala-Cordel]

Marriage is a spook, but it's nice for poly people I guess. They're doing no harm, so I don't see any reason not to.

[Celritannia]

And if the law changes to involve Polyamory marriages, like in this case, it does not involve anyone here.

But it does, because under accepted liberal social theory the US is a patriarchal nation and legal poly will inherently come to favor high class men to the detriment of everyone else, which causes social tension.

That would be a harem, not a polyamorous marriage.
Which happen anyway.

[Celritannia]

I am not using ancap logic.
I too elect my Parliament, but the private lives of individuals do not concern me.

Marriage and social interaction more generally is not the private life of an individual.

I'll be sure to send you a wedding invitation for mine then, in the future.

[Diopolis]

What's with this PMC liberalism? Actually answer an argument.

I am answering an argument. I see no reason why individuals need to concern themselves with the marriages of private citizens.

I just told you- there can only be one societal default and it's a zero sum game what it is. If we share a society, then I should be very interested in anything you do that affects what the societal default is.

[Celritannia]

Private lives of all citizens concern all other citizens.

It would probably be harmful to women and cause more scorn etc. I see no reason why this should be legalized.

Most examples of polyamorous relationships show it isn't