Should married people be allowed to sleep with other people?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Which begs the question, "If you do not want or intend to forsake all others, then why be married?"

is the only kind of commitment that exists to you sexual? ie, it is a symbol of love rather than a symbol of sexual exclusiveness? lol, or should all people be forced to live with traditional interpretations of marriage?

what about polyamorus marriages?

and the obvious, what about the tax benefits?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Tax...benefits.

Then it becomes a marriage of convenience. In which case, why marry this specific person? Why not marry someone else altogether?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Then it becomes a marriage of convenience. In which case, why marry this specific person? Why not marry someone else altogether?

Originally posted by inimalist
is the only kind of commitment that exists to you sexual? ie, it is a symbol of love rather than a symbol of sexual exclusiveness? [b]lol, or should all people be forced to live with traditional interpretations of marriage?

what about polyamorus marriages?

and the obvious, what about the tax benefits? [/B]

If there is no sexual exclusivity in their relationship, then how are they different than friends who occasionally sleep together?

What of polygamy?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Cause you want to marry someone that you can trust not to screw you over in the long run?

Then one would do better to marry a sibling, a parent, or another blood relative.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If there is no sexual exclusivity in their relationship, then how are they different than friends who occasionally sleep together?

What of polygamy?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Then one would do better to marry a sibling, a parent, or another blood relative.

Originally posted by Bardock42
True, is illegal though.

So is polygamy.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So is polygamy.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If there is no sexual exclusivity in their relationship, then how are they different than friends who occasionally sleep together?

the only difference between a person's mate and their friends is that they sleep together?

I would think, emotional commitment, loyalty, honesty, etc.

but more importantly than anything, why should traditional definitions of marriage apply to people who consensually want to live without monogamy but not to homosexuals? Or why not to women who want a choice in who they marry?

I must say, it seems really odd to see you playing the tradition card here. I'd think you would be motivated to have marriage be defined as much by choice as possible.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
What of polygamy?

i see what you did there

The term I used was polyamory, its a tad different than polygamy

but basically, what about people who are in relationships with more than one person?

Originally posted by Bardock42
They aren't. But it doesn't matter, I mean in your scenario you could just as well ask "How are they different than friends who exclusively sleep together?"

I would argue that those are characteristics of a partner.

Marriage is a joint venture; each partner contributes capital and assumes risk, and together, they share in the profits. Couples who choose not to be monogamous want to share in the profits without assuming the risk, i.e. they want the benefits of marriage without the responsibilities.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Tax...benefits.

Benefits that will probably get canceled out by wedding/divorce costs anyways.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I would argue that those are characteristics of a partner.

Seems pretty subjective. To me it's more loyalty and deep friendhsip and honesty and those.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Marriage is a joint venture; each partner contributes capital and assumes risk, and together, they share in the profits. Couples who choose not to be monogamous want to share in the profits without assuming the risk, i.e. they want the benefits of marriage without the responsibilities.

It's ridiculous to create an artificial risk. If the partners don't want to be monogamous they shouldn't be. Monogamy is not a benefit of marriage, you can have that outside of it as well.

Originally posted by inimalist
the only difference between a person's mate and their friends is that they sleep together?

I would think, emotional commitment, loyalty, honesty, etc.

I would think that honesty, loyalty, etc. are characteristics that one would require of a friend; and foremost, a partner is a friend.

Originally posted by inimalist
but more importantly than anything, why should traditional definitions of marriage apply to people who consensually want to live without monogamy but not to homosexuals? Or why not to women who want a choice in who they marry?

I must say, it seems really odd to see you playing the tradition card here. I'd think you would be motivated to have marriage be defined as much by choice as possible.

There is a fundamental difference between one marrying the partner of his choice, and one having the marriage of his choice. The former wants to marry the partner of his choosing, the latter wants to choose the parts of marriage he wants to participate in.

Originally posted by inimalist
i see what you did there

The term I used was polyamory, its a tad different than polygamy

but basically, what about people who are in relationships with more than one person?

What about them?

Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
I had this discussion with a friend the other day, so I thought I would put it to you guys on here.

My stance on this is yes. I actually know some couples that do this, they love each other and they stay with each other, they just get sexually bored of each other from time to time and have a little fun on the side. And those couples have stayed together for years longer then the monogamous ones I know have.

I think a huge problem in society today is that we put so much pressure and importance on sex. We get so stressed over it and make such a huge deal out of it that it ends up for allot of people taking the fun out of it.

I think as long as a person is safe and takes precautions and the other person in the relationship is fine with it then they should be allowed to occasionally have casual sex with other people.

But I do know there is other opinions out there and I want to hear them, so let's hear it guys, what do you think on this subject?

Well, porn stars do it. Many married porn celebs do it all the time.

I personally not too fond of the idea. That's just me. That it happens...oh, it does happen. There is no denying it. How do I view them isn't really important.... just like it isn't important how they view me.

I live my life and bother no one. You bother me...Go F yourself (no pun intended)

Originally posted by Bardock42
Seems pretty subjective. To me it's more loyalty and deep friendhsip and honesty and those.

If a partner is not also a friend with whom one has an exclusive sexual relationship, then why marry someone that you are sexually attracted to at all? Why should a heterosexual man, not marry a male friend who is also heterosexual if honesty, loyalty, etc. are all that is necessary for a marital partnership?

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's ridiculous to create an artificial risk. If the partners don't want to be monogamous they shouldn't be. Monogamy is not a benefit of marriage, you can have that outside of it as well.

Monogamy is not a benefit of marriage; it is a sacrifice that one makes in order to receive the benefits of marriage.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If a partner is not also a friend with whom one has an exclusive sexual relationship, then why marry someone that you are sexually attracted to at all? Why should a heterosexual man, not marry a male friend who is also heterosexual if honesty, loyalty, etc. are all that is necessary for a marital partnership?

Preaching to the choir, man.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Monogamy is not a benefit of marriage; it is a sacrifice that one makes in order to receive the benefits of marriage.

Doesn't have to be.

Originally posted by Robtard
What would you do if you still loved your husband, you had a great family/life together, but the sex he was giving you failed and failed some more?

There's a thing called masturbation. 😉 Besides...Matts sex will never be boring. He always finds a way to "spice it up"

Originally posted by Bardock42
Doesn't have to be.

Marriage is a joint venture. If one wants the benefits, but not the responsibilities of a marriage, then he does not want a joint venture, he wants a strategic alliance.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Marriage is a joint venture. If one wants the benefits, but not the responsibilities of a marriage, then he does not want a joint venture, he wants a strategic alliance.

Look, regardless of what you personally believe, monogamy in a marriage is not necessary.

Personally I think there should be no government funded marriage whatsoever, but if it exists, it should at least not force people to be monogamous.