fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3386 ]

[ SECRET POST #3386 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3386 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Bit early today, sorry!

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 058 secrets from Secret Submission Post #484.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Utah courts just reaffirmed polygamy being illegal. That is, it's illegal to purport that more than one person is your "spouse", even if you are legally married to only one.

I don't really get this. In practice, fuck most polygamist religious cults because this is generally done for sexist reasons, and is frequently tied up with underage girls being "married".

But legally, it's one thing to say the law will only allow one legal marriage at a time, but how can you say it's wrong for someone to be "spiritually married" to others? What about non-religious polymorous people?

You're going to have to give me more specifics.

Is it illegal to claim, like to a friend, that you and two people are spiritually married?

Or is it illegal to claim, like on your health insurance, tax returns, and other legal and totally unrelated to spirituality things, that you and two people are spiritually married?

Because you can't do the latter in any other state either.

The previous.

The cases in Utah among Mormons, it's almost always the case that only one is a legal spouse, the others are not. They simply live together and call themselves spouses - which is what is illegal.

Yeah that's pretty dumb - though I say this as someone who has never been to Utah and is not terribly familiar with all the cultural forces at play

It's not being ruled illegal in a vacuum. As you say, it's because religious cuckoobirds decide that the young girls need to be married to the all-powerful prophet whether they like it or not.

Among consenting adults? Have at it, I suppose, though I could see it leading to certain legal entanglements. It would have to be negotiated almost like a partnership agreement - which wife/husband gets to make medical decisions if their partner is incapacitated? Who goes on the title of the house? How should their wills be written so as to be interpreted clearly?

SA

Can more than one spouse be made beneficiary on an insurance policy? And what about medical coverage? Could more than one spouse be considered "family" and brought under the same coverage? How would we avoid sham marriages, if people could marry more than one person? Maybe they would get married just for insurance or just for citizenship, particularly if it's not a one-at-a-time deal.

I mean that's why you can only be legally married to one person. The question is whether it's ok to casually describe a relationship as spousal - which seems like a free speech thing, unless you are making claims in a legal context, and also how would you even enforce that?

The legal question is far more interesting. You can call whoever you want your spouse. That has never even been a question, and wasn't in the case OP referenced.

Did you read the case and the issue in Utah in general? No, it's NOT about being able to legally marry more than one person - which hasn't been debated - it's about being able to live with someone and call them your spouse while still being married to someone else, who you also live with.

Let me specify what I mean by legal context - things like putting someone down as your spouse on taxes, for example. But OP's post implied it's illegal to even say, in casual conversation, that someone is your spouse when they are not your legal spouse, which again, seems to violate free speech and be basically unenforceable.

But it is ruled illegal. Authorities just say they won't go after polygamists who otherwise follow the law.

Yeah the paperwork and legal entanglements would be absurd.

How would money get split up in a divorce? What if they parent a child together. Who gets custody? I can see a less progressive judge only giving it to the genetic parents.

You can't really compare polygamy to polyamory, though. In just about most western models of polygamy (barring poly folks trying to use the term for some damn reason) it's a patriarchal thing. It's always one guy and multiple wives, with a definite power hierarchy.

Polyamorous people who aren't creepy don't work like that.

But you're just talking about one model of polygamy. Taking the word by its own definition alone, there's nothing that obligates it to only mean one man, multiple wives in a religious conservative context. What else would the opposite of monogamy be? If polyamorous people were to have multiple marriages, "symbolic" or "lawful" regardless, I would assume the correct term describing their situation would be polygamy.

Yes, but there's definition and practice. We tend to be concerned about it in the US (and the west in general) because it's following a patriarchal, hierarchical and frequently authoritarian model.

Polyamorous relationships are, again, usually different. I don't see a reason to use a poisoned word.

Polygamy's kind of like communism, I suppose. In theory, it could work. In practice, through sheer numbers, women end up taken advantage of and young men end up thrown out of the community onto the streets because their existence means a threat to the men already in power.

Modern day polyamory where the women themselves are free to find multiple lovers too, if they so choose? Totally different story. But you still get into the bind of who's entitled to what estate-wise. I guess that's what a will is for.

Polygamy's kind of like communism...In theory, it could work. In practice, through sheer numbers [it's worth protecting people against legally]

MTE

The kind of polygamy under discussion should be illegal, since it's basically an excuse for underage and/or unwilling women to have to marry some gross creep for religious reasons (that basically amount to "my religion says old white dudes are entitled to have sex with lots of pretty young women so we can outbreed the heathen"). I dunno about a group of people just deciding to marry each other; it sounds like a gigantic clusterfuck for things like health insurance, retirement benefits, potential divorce and custody agreements, etc, but aside from that it's not really my business. I personally am very much not into it (too selfish and jealous to share tbh) but if they wanna give lawyers headaches and possibly make them very rich I don't care.

See, I am not opposed to monogamous legal marriage for the reasons you state - it'd a legal headache.

But I don't care if consenting adults all live together and consider themselves spouses, even if they aren't "legally" married.

But legally, it's one thing to say the law will only allow one legal marriage at a time, but how can you say it's wrong for someone to be "spiritually married" to others?

Well fuck, I guess I'm committing bigamy since I have more than one robot waifu.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3386 ]

Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?

Re: Should polygamy be illegal?