Should married people be allowed to sleep with other people?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't actually think it does generally. The definition is just being married to more than one person. Not necessarily a man being married to many women.

indeed, it appears i am wrong, polygyny is the word for man taking many wives.

in this case, polyamory would be a form of polygamy where there is an emphasis on consent and equality.

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, it appears i am wrong, polygyny is the word for man taking many wives.

in this case, polyamory would be a form of polygamy where there is an emphasis on consent and equality.

Well, I can tell you how I use the words, which might, or might not be what others use it is.

Polygamy: Any form of group marriage.

Polyamory: Any form of non-monogamous relationship.

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, it appears i am wrong, polygyny is the word for man taking many wives.

in this case, polyamory would be a form of polygamy where there is an emphasis on consent and equality.

Polyamory is a relationship, not a form of marriage.

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix

As hard as it is for you to get, people can be in a loving and committed marriage and still sleep with others occasionally.

Again, I never said it was not possible but that it is hard to maintain a realtionship REGARDLESS but sex with other people certainly can add strain.

That's it. You keep pulling some politician crap and are not even quoting me to show what I said. You keep putting your head into a hole without checking to smell it first.

It doesn't have to add strain if it's agreed upon by both spouses in the marriage.

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
Married to more then one person is also illegal in Canada, Polyamory however is legal.

contradiction in terms

having sex with lots of people is not polyamory

being polyamorous is not like being homosexual. Its defined by the relationship itself, and, I would argue, a very strong level of commitment by all people, to the same extent that a marriage might require.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I've never heard a definition of polyamory that requires people to be married and the government cannot legislate love.

fair enough, though, I don't know that it is entirely relevant to the debate, polyamorous marriages are still illegal. Also, polyamorous activists are fighting for marital recognition, so that the definition does not include marriage may reflect more the fact that they cannot be married.

if you want me to talk about government legislation of this stuff, sure, I agree, but then, there should be no legally defined marriage. I'm cool with that, as symbolic rituals like that aren't very important in my life (though the tax and property benefits/rights that come with marriage are) and if I were to ever have a personal wedding, it would be something I wouldn't want the government involved in anyway.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Polygamy usually refers to any form of group marriage when used in a non-technical sense.

indeed

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
It doesn't have to add strain if it's agreed upon by both spouses in the marriage.

You never changed your mind about anything?

You are making people sound robotic as if we all stick to everything we say, at all times.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Polyamory: Any form of non-monogamous relationship.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Polyamory is a relationship, not a form of marriage.

I would disagree with this, like I mentioned before, that polyamory is confined to non-marital relationships sort of prevents it from having "marriage" in its definition.

However, idealistically, polyamorous relationships are based on levels of trust and commitment that are similar to that of marriage.

lol, we could argue terms all day, like I said before, regardless of how you want to slice it, polyamorous marriage is still illegal, and polyamory activists are fighting for marriage rights.

Originally posted by inimalist
I would disagree with this, like I mentioned before, that polyamory is confined to non-marital relationships sort of prevents it from having "marriage" in its definition.

However, idealistically, polyamorous relationships are based on levels of trust and commitment that are similar to that of marriage.

lol, we could argue terms all day, like I said before, regardless of how you want to slice it, polyamorous marriage is still illegal, and polyamory activists are fighting for marriage rights.

Originally posted by inimalist
I would disagree with this, like I mentioned before, that polyamory is confined to non-marital relationships sort of prevents it from having "marriage" in its definition.

However, idealistically, polyamorous relationships are based on levels of trust and commitment that are similar to that of marriage.

lol, we could argue terms all day, like I said before, regardless of how you want to slice it, polyamorous marriage is still illegal, and polyamory activists are fighting for marriage rights.

Yeah, I agree with that much.

Originally posted by Bardock42
True, true. We are all on the same page...I think we should keep the important stuff in mind...like...that we all hate Aster Phoenix.

2nd

If they change their minds then that's something they can discuss. But not everyone would.

Originally posted by Bardock42
True, true. We are all on the same page...I think we should keep the important stuff in mind...like...that we all hate Aster Phoenix.

That's pretty sad that you can't accept someone having a different view then yourself. You guys are stuck in a 50's idea of what marriage is.

Change their minds on what? We are talking about definitions and you put out an implied subject...

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
That's pretty sad that you can't accept someone having a different view then yourself. You guys are stuck in a 50's idea of what marriage is.

Clown.

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
That's pretty sad that you can't accept someone having a different view then yourself. You guys are stuck in a 50's idea of what marriage is.

A white man taking legal ownership of a woman, his absolute inferior in the eyes of God and science? Nah.

The legal definition of modern marriage stands despite moral disagreement.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's kinda why I think you are a clown. If you read any of my posts (of which there are quite a few) you'd know that I agree with you on the subject.

Clown.

And that's why I'm becoming an English teacher in middle school. It's like he can read the words but he can't form an argument or tell what the other guy is saying EVEN IF HE AGREES WITH HIM.

I would love to see him in a debate on next-gen consoles. 💃

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A white man taking legal ownership of a woman, his absolute inferior in the eyes of God and science? Nah.

The legal definition of modern marriage stands despite moral disagreement.

As far as I know the legal definition does not exclude having sex with other people as long as your spouse is okay with it.

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
As far as I know the legal definition does not exclude having sex with other people as long as your spouse is okay with it.

Are you just switching arguments every time someone starts to agree with you?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Are you just switching arguments every time someone starts to agree with you?

It's like either he is brilliantly ****ing with us, or really that slow.