Could bigamy be next?

blackcard

50 years ago, a majority would have opposed divorce and contraception in Ireland. 25 years ago, a majority would have opposed same sex marriage. In another 25 years, could bigamy be legal in Ireland? What would be wrong with it if all parties involved are happy with it? Nothing morally wrong with it.

Pretzill

blackcard wrote: »

What would be wrong with it if all parties involved are happy with it? Nothing morally wrong with it.

That's bigayou




(Get's coat before another what's-next thread opens)

Duckworth_Luas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ust6bUwqqUc

One eyed Jack

blackcard wrote: »

50 years ago, a majority would have opposed divorce and contraception in Ireland. 25 years ago, a majority would have opposed same sex marriage. In another 25 years, could bigamy be legal in Ireland? What would be wrong with it if all parties involved are happy with it? Nothing morally wrong with it.

The whole point of criminalising bigamy is because all parties aren't privy to the fact. That's only one of the reasons why it's both immoral and illegal -

In cultures that practice marital monogamy, bigamy is the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still legally married to another. Bigamy is a crime in most western countries, and when it occurs in this context often neither the first nor second spouse is aware of the other. In countries that have bigamy laws, consent from a prior spouse makes no difference to the legality of the second marriage, which is usually considered void.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigamy

Not a NSA agent

It could be done but requires a bit more work. I think we would have to get to a stage where there are more people going for that sort of thing and others get used to it being around, if only I could convince the girlfriend!

Its often used in cultures which dont have the best history in terms of treating people equal but marriage wasnt much better.

blackcard

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The whole point of criminalising bigamy is because all parties aren't privy to the fact. That's only one of the reasons why it's both immoral and illegal -





http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigamy

But if all parties are aware of the circumstances, what is the problem? And what is morally wrong with it? I'm not saying that it is for everyone but it could be a happy arrangement for some.

Turtwig

As long as it's mutually consensual and nobody is being harmed, who gives a sht?

DarkyHughes

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

One eyed Jack

blackcard wrote: »

But if all parties are aware of the circumstances, what is the problem? And what is morally wrong with it? I'm not saying that it is for everyone but it could be a happy arrangement for some.

If all parties are aware of the circumstances, then it's not bigamy in the moral sense, but because the State considers the second marriage void, then it's bigamy in the legal sense, and there are plenty of legal implications to one individual in two different marriages.

You've yet to actually make a convincing argument as to why you think bigamy would be beneficial to society. You're going to have to do better than just because it makes people happy. There's lots of things would make me happy, but I understand why they are illegal.

mad muffin

I think OP is confusing bigamy with polygamy...

zeffabelli

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

It's a perfectly valid arguement now.

If its consenting adults then there is no reason not to allow it if you allow gay marriage, you theoretically should also allow any other adult consenting marriage.

Otherwise you are privaleging monogamy and discriminating against polygamists and familiy members who may want to marry.

GreatDefector

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

Let's add a poll

silverfeather

blackcard wrote: »

50 years ago, a majority would have opposed divorce and contraception in Ireland. 25 years ago, a majority would have opposed same sex marriage. In another 25 years, could bigamy be legal in Ireland? What would be wrong with it if all parties involved are happy with it? Nothing morally wrong with it.

You mean polygamy. Bigamy is when it's illegal.
Privileging an act is different to privileging a group of people. It usually ends up with many more kids than usual marriage with fewer parents.

Monogamy all the way!

blackcard

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

I voted for the referendum. The point I am making is that it would have been unthinkable 25 years ago that the SSM referendum would have passed
Could it not be possible that marriage to two people could be legalised at some point in the future?

Grandpa Hassan

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

I have an idea....why don't you unfollow the thread

kneemos

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

Are people not entitled to be unhappy? You don't seem to have a problem with happy people?

Saipanne

I do think polygamy is for future legislation. I have no opposition to it.

zeffabelli

I think getting rid of marriage altogether solves a lot of problems.

kneemos

There's a nice looking horse down the field.

aaronjumper

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I have an idea....why don't you unfollow the thread

I think it's more than one thread though. Page one of After Hours appears to be "Will (insert something here) be next?" because the vote went through.

syklops

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I have an idea....why don't you unfollow the thread

Why don't you leave him alone.

pmasterson95

aaronjumper wrote: »

I think it's more than one thread though. Page one of After Hours appears to be "Will (insert something here) be next?" because the vote went through.

AH should be cleansed and this crap moved to gay and election forums.

aaronjumper

pmasterson95 wrote: »

AH should be cleansed and this crap moved to gay and election forums.

Or just merge them into one megathread and delete newcomers. I like an oul whinge myself when things don't go the way I want them to but all the different threads are hard to keep up with.

blackcard

aaronjumper wrote: »

Or just merge them into one megathread and delete newcomers. I like an oul whinge myself when things don't go the way I want them to but all the different threads are hard to keep up with.

Again I voted yes in the referendum and I am happy it passed. I think I am asking a legitimate question even if it is not the most important issue for most people

aaronjumper

blackcard wrote: »

Again I voted yes in the referendum and I am happy it passed. I think I am asking a legitimate question even if it is not the most important issue for most people

Wasn't attacking you personally, the other threads seem to be slowing down anyway. Just a lot of these threads popping up today. Easier to manage if it was in one big pile rather than lots of little ones was all I was saying. Or trying to.

endacl

aaronjumper wrote: »

Wasn't attacking you personally, the other threads seem to be slowing down anyway. Just a lot of these threads popping up today. Easier to manage if it was in one big pile rather than lots of little ones was all I was saying. Or trying to.

Marriage whataboutery mega thread time? A stupidity repository?

kneemos

It's the yes/no option that's causing the controversy.

aaronjumper

endacl wrote: »

Marriage whataboutery mega thread time? A stupidity repository?

I'm trying really hard to be respectful of other peoples opinions but that made me laugh. Actually out loud. :pac:

zeffabelli

silverfeather wrote: »

You mean polygamy. Bigamy is when it's illegal.
Privileging an act is different to privileging a group of people. It usually ends up with many more kids than usual marriage with fewer parents.

Monogamy all the way!

Actually, with the five year divorce wait and the cohabitation bills, we already have polygamy.

Alt J

Lemons Lemons how do them lemons taste

Grandpa Hassan

endacl wrote: »

Marriage whataboutery mega thread time? A stupidity repository?

I don't get it all anyway. What's the point of marriage? That would be my angle on such a thread (and that of my long term gf). I really don't get why people get so excited it. I don't see why you need the bit of paper to demonstrate your love for someone. I do that through the things I do every day. It wouldn't make my relationship any stronger. I voted yes, but for only equality reasons. The fact that it was relating to marriage is irrelevant to me.

endacl

aaronjumper wrote: »

I'm trying really hard to be respectful of other peoples opinions but that made me laugh. Actually out loud. :pac:

I'm not. I'm just laughing.

Free Hat

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I don't get it all anyway. What's the point of marriage? That would be my angle on such a thread (and that of my long term gf). I really don't get why people get so excited it. I don't see why you need the bit of paper to demonstrate your love for someone. I do that through the things I do every day. It wouldn't make my relationship any stronger. I voted yes, but for only equality reasons. The fact that it was relating to marriage is irrelevant to me.

That was my argument to my long term girlfriend also. We got engaged last November.

kneemos

endacl wrote: »

Marriage whataboutery mega thread time? A stupidity repository?

Prime location for a sniper.

Buona Fortuna

Saipanne wrote: »

I do think polygamy is for future legislation. I have no opposition to it.

I think it should be compulsory.

kowloon

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Can the mods do their jobs please & delete these stupid ****ing threads because a few assholes are unhappy with how a democratic vote went.

Expect threads like this for a while. Eventually they'll get bored, realise society hasn't collapsed and move onto the next threat to humanity.

blackcard

Why do some people assume that having a view on a marriage with 3 or more people means they are disgruntled with the result of the referendum? I thought they would be the same people who would welcome equal opportunity for all people

S.O

Or could marriage between close relatives. ie incest be next in the next 20 or 30 years, 20 years ago a referendum on same sex marriage wouldn't of passed , when society no longer sees certain things as taboo or wrong other things will follow suit, Germany EUs biggest economy a German committee said the following a few months ago.

Laws banning incest between brothers and sisters in Germany could be scrapped after a government ethics committee said the they were an unacceptable intrusion into the right to sexual self-determination.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

If Germany scrapped anti incest laws other countries in the EU could follow suit, once incest is no longer a criminal offence as homosexuality once was, the next step is the argument for the right to marry.

endacl

It's a slippery slope indeed. Soon they'll be letting any idiot with an internet connection post on here about legalising incest.

Saipanne

S.O wrote: »

Or could marriage between close relatives. ie incest be next in the next 20 or 30 years, 20 years ago a referendum on same sex marriage wouldn't of passed , when society no longer sees certain things as taboo or wrong other things will follow suit, Germany EUs biggest economy a German committee said the following a few months ago.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

If Germany scrapped anti incest laws other countries in the EU could follow suit, once incest is no longer a criminal offence as homosexuality once was, the next step is the argument for the right to marry.

I don't advocate incest, but it is none of the states business if siblings choose to be with each other.

I don't think I would support incestuous marriage though...

Mr.Nice Guy

I don't approve of bigamy and neither do any of my wives.

One eyed Jack

blackcard wrote: »

Why do some people assume that having a view on a marriage with 3 or more people means they are disgruntled with the result of the referendum? I thought they would be the same people who would welcome equal opportunity for all people

Access to monogamous civil marriage for people who are LGBT, is completely unrelated to bigamy or polygamous marriage.

S.O wrote: »

Or could marriage between close relatives. ie incest be next in the next 20 or 30 years, 20 years ago a referendum on same sex marriage wouldn't of passed , when society no longer sees certain things as taboo or wrong other things will follow suit, Germany EUs biggest economy a German committee said the following a few months ago.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

If Germany scrapped anti incest laws other countries in the EU could follow suit, once incest is no longer a criminal offence as homosexuality once was, the next step is the argument for the right to marry.

Nice misrepresentation there S.O., unsurprising really. What you failed to mention this time is that was simply a government funded think tank, not the German Government itself (the German Government have already said there are no plans to decriminalise incest and they are supported in this decision by the EHCR).

You're also struggling if you think that the same arguments that were made for decriminalising homosexuality can be made for decriminalising incest.


(not to mention that any arguments you could come up with are entirely facetious given you tried to argue against marriage equality for people who are LGBT, but you would have no issues with incestuous marriage... you'll forgive me if I can't take your arguments seriously).

Paramite Pie

I think the right to Euthanasia will be the next big referendum. There's been a few court cases already & that's how it starts.

Polygamy is something that I'd vote for but I don't see myself ever having more than one partner.

But is there a limit to how many people could be legally married? Could over a 1000+ people marry just to break a world record? That'd could be a bit of a legal/tax mess!

fidia

Lol I have to laugh. All the people came back from all over the world to vote for this and yet they wouldn't vote out a government if the country was on fire.

People are so stupid. They bought huge houses, went on holidays multiple times a year and then can't understand why they have to pay it all back now. Yet they will vote back in the same idiot government.

I bet if there was a vote to allow gays to roger each other with a 1000 degree hot poker it would get the world voting. When the elections come around they wont be seen for dead.

Saipanne

Saipanne wrote: »

I do think polygamy is for future legislation. I have no opposition to it.

Will need a referendum, the Constitution still refers to marriage being contracted by two people only.

Geniass

How could any man not approve of the possibility of marrying two sisters, twins even.

Giggity

Merces

Creating these moronic hypothetical threads won't alter the referendum result. Just suck it up.

biko

The day a Saudi Arabian woman can have 4 husbands I think human race is ready for polygamy (it's actually called polyandry then).

darkpagandeath

kowloon wrote: »

Expect threads like this for a while. Eventually they'll get bored, realise society hasn't collapsed and move onto the next threat to humanity.

What's that supposed to mean it's all about Love equality ? If consenting adults want to engage in different kinds of relations who are we to stop them ?

Wurzelbert

blackcard wrote: »

50 years ago, a majority would have opposed divorce and contraception in Ireland. 25 years ago, a majority would have opposed same sex marriage. In another 25 years, could bigamy be legal in Ireland? What would be wrong with it if all parties involved are happy with it? Nothing morally wrong with it.

yeah, well…i think there can be no serious doubt that most remaining taboos and legal restrictions, be it around bigamy, polygamy, incest, paedophilia, zoophilia, necrophilia or whatever, are going to fall in the decades and generations to come, both legally and in public perception; not only in ireland but all over europe and the western world…their abolition has already been on the agenda of major political parties (e.g. the german greens) and will be hot again once they feel the time is ripe…can’t say i am a great fan of the whole trend, but who am i to say…

Balmed Out

Wurzelbert wrote: »

yeah, well…i think there can be no serious doubt that most remaining taboos and legal restrictions, be it around bigamy, polygamy, incest, paedophilia, zoophilia, necrophilia or whatever, are going to fall in the decades and generations to come, both legally and in public perception; not only in ireland but all over europe and the western world…their abolition has already been on the agenda of major political parties (e.g. the german greens) and will be hot again once they feel the time is ripe…can’t say i am a great fan of the whole trend, but who am i to say…

I think there very definitely can be serious doubt.