Is Open Marriage Immoral?

[SirWagginston]

While you or I may or may not live in a Republic, I believe that you're mistaking the concept of Republic with Democracy.

The will of the people can only go so far in a Republic. In a pure Democracy, the will of the people reigns supreme... despite unalienable civil liberties...

I'm not mistaking the concept; I'm recognizing the fact that the citizens of many modern republics don't really care about "unalienable" liberties, and so their elected officials don't, either. American politicians shit all over the Constitution on a regular basis, and the Supreme Court frequently does nothing about it.

Did you know that anal sex was illegal in my hometown until 2003? The punishment for it was 1-5 years in jail. If republican governments usually held liberty above the will of the people, stuff like that wouldn't happen. Homosexuals would have equal rights, censorship would be nonexistent, public nudity would be tolerated, and I would never have gotten arrested for smoking weed.

[the_robot]

Did you know that anal sex was illegal in my hometown until 2003? The punishment for it was 1-5 years in jail. If republican governments usually held liberty above the will of the people, stuff like that wouldn't happen. Homosexuals would have equal rights, censorship would be nonexistent, public nudity would be tolerated, and I would never have gotten arrested for smoking weed.

Some laws are plain stupid.

[Doc Durian]

I'm not mistaking the concept; I'm recognizing the fact that the citizens of many modern republics don't really care about "unalienable" liberties, and so their elected officials don't, either. American politicians shit all over the Constitution on a regular basis, and the Supreme Court frequently does nothing about it.

Did you know that anal sex was illegal in my hometown until 2003? The punishment for it was 1-5 years in jail. If republican governments usually held liberty above the will of the people, stuff like that wouldn't happen. Homosexuals would have equal rights, censorship would be nonexistent, public nudity would be tolerated, and I would never have gotten arrested for smoking weed.

ie... Republic negated in concept..

yup.

[Mish]

What do you think about open marriage? Do you think it is immoral because it is not monogamous? Do you have the same moral outrage toward marriages which are sexless?

I agree with everyone else. A consentual open marriage is not immoral. If two people agree that this is the best thing for them, then why not? Open marriage only becomes a problem when one of the partners doesn't agree to it and the other starts using forceful tactics and coercion. For example threatening a divorce if their wish is not granted. Or threatening to take custody of children.

In the long run though, open marriage is a self defeating prospect. I'd think it quite hard to enjoy an open marriage in 60s or 70s. So I assume open marriage is something people do for sex gratification only and stop the open marriage completely as they get older. I.e. open marriage is not sustainable.

[IndiReloaded]

IMO, there are few things that are 'immoral' if the decision is made by mutually consenting adults and only affects them. This goes for open marriage, assisted suicide and several other things the government has no right to be involved in.

There is a guy in BC who wants the right to be married to his 14 wives (or whatever). Go for it, I say. I don't think the government should be involved in defining marriage. The government wants to limit his ability to claim his 40 kids as dependents. Why? If they are all his, biologically, and he can prove he supports them, then go ahead and claim it. There are businesses with fewer employees that get to claim the wages they pay.

The only thing he shouldn't be able to do is claim multiple spousal deductions. Not b/c its wrong, but b/c its unfair to all the other tax payers who are limited to one. If they want to change the laws to allow other marriage alternatives (e.g. line marriages) that's fine, but the laws will have to change to be fair to everyone. Gays, polygamists, Heinlein line-marriages, etc.

[Mish]

There is a guy in BC who wants the right to be married to his 14 wives (or whatever). Go for it, I say. I don't think the government should be involved in defining marriage.

Was that the Israeli guy who was found locking them up and raping them? I think in those cases the government should interfere.

Imo, I think it would be pretty hard to have more than one wife and not abuse her or keep her against her will in one form or another. In all the cases I've seen the wives were treated like cattle.

[IndiReloaded]

No not him. We have a polygamist Mormon off-shoot from Utah living in BC

[url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jseTUK8EIFNxgpluHEq8nPWXFfKg]The Canadian Press: Blackmore seeks standing, funding in case that will test Canada's polygamy law[/url]

[Mish]

No not him. We have a polygamist Mormon off-shoot from Utah living in BC

[url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jseTUK8EIFNxgpluHEq8nPWXFfKg]The Canadian Press: Blackmore seeks standing, funding in case that will test Canada's polygamy law[/url]

Wow, 19 wives and 100 children? Is he the one who supports them? Or is he bankrolling the state? Are they all taken care of or subject to abuse?

[IndiReloaded]

I don't know. I'm going to go on a road trip to visit Bountiful one of these years to visit for myself. Once I'm past my useful reproductive years and don't need to worry about being abducted. Not that they wouldn't realize their mistake almost immediately.