Somerville, Mass to recognize polyamorous partnerships

[Punished UMN]

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.

Do you know what marriage and social interaction are?

[Celritannia]

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.

I do not need to disclose anything with someone that isn't involved with my life. And as long as I obey the law, nothing will really be taken into consideration by government officials.

[Punished UMN]

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.

I do not need to disclose anything with someone that isn't involved with my life. And as long as I obey the law, nothing will really be taken into consideration by government officials.

Your local tax official disagrees : ^)

[Celritannia]

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

Do you know what marriage and social interaction are?

I do, but again, if one person in a marriage is having difficulties, they would consult a close friend, or a legal advisor. Not a random citizen.

[Diopolis]

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.

I do not need to disclose anything with someone that isn't involved with my life. And as long as I obey the law, nothing will really be taken into consideration by government officials.

Except that the style of relationship you prefer changes the societal default, which directly affects the expectations of everyone else in your society.
"Muh autonomous individualism" really isn't a good answer to that.

[Celritannia]

I do not need to disclose anything with someone that isn't involved with my life. And as long as I obey the law, nothing will really be taken into consideration by government officials.

Your local tax official disagrees : ^)

Indeed, and they are government official.

Not a random person.

[Washington Resistance Army]

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.

Indeed, but it's not a widely accepted social norm. Making poly legal nationwide would only provide incentive for women to try and become part of said harems for an easy life. Such arrangements are not viable or coercion free in a nation with wealth and gender inequality and will only create problems. Only in an idealistic libertarian utopia is this a good idea.

[Punished UMN]

Do you know what marriage and social interaction are?

I do, but again, if one person in a marriage is having difficulties, they would consult a close friend, or a legal advisor. Not a random citizen.

I have already explained this: the government represents the interests of all citizens. Marriage is a social, not private contract. It is regulated by the government for the interests of all members of society, not just for the interests of the people getting married.

[Punished UMN]

Your local tax official disagrees : ^)

Indeed, and they are government official.

Not a random person.

What is the function of government?

[Celritannia]

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

Indeed, but it's not a widely accepted social norm. Making poly legal nationwide would only provide incentive for women to try and become part of said harems for an easy life. Such arrangements are not viable or coercion free in a nation with wealth and gender inequality and will only create problems. Only in an idealistic libertarian utopia is this a good idea.

I disagree. Polyamorous relationships that exist already do not do it for money. Money just becomes easy when you have 3 or 4 people pulling paychecks.

But again, what you described would be more polygamy, not polyamory.

[Diopolis]

Indeed, and they are government official.

Not a random person.

What is the function of government?

To replace the individual in pursuing blood vengeance.

[Celritannia]

Indeed, and they are government official.

Not a random person.

What is the function of government?

To execute laws set by the legislature, elected by the people.

Does not mean what my representatives vote for on my behalf gives you an entitlement into my life.

[South Odreria 2]

I do, but again, if one person in a marriage is having difficulties, they would consult a close friend, or a legal advisor. Not a random citizen.

I have already explained this: the government represents the interests of all citizens. Marriage is a social, not private contract. It is regulated by the government for the interests of all members of society, not just for the interests of the people getting married.

It’s getting a little based in here

[Punished UMN]

What is the function of government?

To execute laws set by the legislature, elected by the people.

Does not mean what my representatives vote for on my behalf gives you an entitlement into my life.

It does however give the government, which represents my interests, an entitlement to your life, just as the government that represents your interests has an entitlement to my life.

[Celritannia]

I do, but again, if one person in a marriage is having difficulties, they would consult a close friend, or a legal advisor. Not a random citizen.

I have already explained this: the government represents the interests of all citizens. Marriage is a social, not private contract. It is regulated by the government for the interests of all members of society, not just for the interests of the people getting married.

*Cough*Common Law Marriages*Cough*

For it's members of society yes.
But does not mean every citizen is privy to the marriages of every fucking individual who gets married.

[Punished UMN]

I have already explained this: the government represents the interests of all citizens. Marriage is a social, not private contract. It is regulated by the government for the interests of all members of society, not just for the interests of the people getting married.

*Cough*Common Law Marriages*Cough*

For it's members of society yes.
But does not mean every citizen is privy to the marriages of every fucking individual who gets married.

No one said they were, but it does mean the government, which represents the interests of every citizen, is privy to the marriages of every individual who gets married.

The government conducts social decision making. Marriage is a social decision. The government conducts marriage.

[Celritannia]

To execute laws set by the legislature, elected by the people.

Does not mean what my representatives vote for on my behalf gives you an entitlement into my life.

It does however give the government, which represents my interests, an entitlement to your life, just as the government that represents your interests has an entitlement to my life.

Not your government
You don't live in the UK.

Does not mean you are privy to know everything about every citizen's private lives.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Indeed, but it's not a widely accepted social norm. Making poly legal nationwide would only provide incentive for women to try and become part of said harems for an easy life. Such arrangements are not viable or coercion free in a nation with wealth and gender inequality and will only create problems. Only in an idealistic libertarian utopia is this a good idea.

I disagree. Polyamorous relationships that exist already do not do it for money. Money just becomes easy when you have 3 or 4 people pulling paychecks.

But again, what you described would be more polygamy, not polyamory.

They don't do it for money currently because they can't. You would need a legal contract and framework like marriage to make that viable.

As I'm sure has been stated before unless you reject the concept of patriarchy you must accept that legal polyam marriages and partnerships would lead solely to polygamous situations. The social fabric to accommodate poly without issues simply isn't there.

[Diopolis]

I have already explained this: the government represents the interests of all citizens. Marriage is a social, not private contract. It is regulated by the government for the interests of all members of society, not just for the interests of the people getting married.

*Cough*Common Law Marriages*Cough*

Which is the perfect example of what I'm talking about; they shifted the societal default to premarital cohabitation through the actions of individuals.

[Punished UMN]

It does however give the government, which represents my interests, an entitlement to your life, just as the government that represents your interests has an entitlement to my life.

Not your government
You don't live in the UK.

Does not mean you are privy to know everything about every citizen's private lives.

I'm speaking abstractly.

[Celritannia]

*Cough*Common Law Marriages*Cough*

For it's members of society yes.
But does not mean every citizen is privy to the marriages of every fucking individual who gets married.

No one said they were, but it does mean the government, which represents the interests of every citizen, is privy to the marriages of every individual who gets married.

The government conducts social decision making. Marriage is a social decision. The government conducts marriage.

Yes, the government.
Not random people.

We can keep going round in circles until you grasp that.

[Celritannia]

Not your government
You don't live in the UK.

Does not mean you are privy to know everything about every citizen's private lives.

I'm speaking abstractly.

And I don't need to disclose anything with anyone on my street.

[Punished UMN]

No one said they were, but it does mean the government, which represents the interests of every citizen, is privy to the marriages of every individual who gets married.

The government conducts social decision making. Marriage is a social decision. The government conducts marriage.

Yes, the government.
Not random people.

We can keep going round in circles until you grasp that.

You're the one not grasping it lmao. If the government conducts marriage, then that means the government decides, taking into mind the interests of all citizens, what marriage should be.

[Punished UMN]

I'm speaking abstractly.

And I don't need to disclose anything with anyone on my street.

Show me one post where I said you do.

[Celritannia]

*Cough*Common Law Marriages*Cough*

Which is the perfect example of what I'm talking about; they shifted the societal default to premarital cohabitation through the actions of individuals.

But if the people vote in a referendum to call for polyamorous marriages to be accepted as a marriage, then that's that. IT won't affect anyone else, and that is my point.