Polygamy - Why is it Illegal?

Polygamy - Why is it Illegal?

Our primary biological purpose is to reproduce as much as possible, why settle for one womb?

its not illegal idiot

/thread

You're thinking of polytheism.

>Why is it Illegal?

social norms: the rules of behavior that are considered acceptable in a group or society. People who do not follow these norms may be shunned or suffer some kind of consequence. Norms change according to the environment or situation and may change or be modified over time.

Yes it is. In America, at least. Probably not in the sandnigger countries.

Why would you worry, anyway? You can't get one woman, much less two.

Damnnn more preggos!

Marrying multiple women is not the same as breeding multiple women you funding retard.

Due to the our religion...
There is no rational reason why it should be illegal.

lmfao u probably can't even get 1 pussy so why are you worried fag. also all the men that are better looking and have more money will have all the women in those relationships then the mass of u fags will still be sitting here jerking on Sup Forums

Only to marry, you can have as many gf/bfs as you like. Kinda the opposite really.

because social stability is a thing. It's important to secure a proper structure, otherwise they turn out like niggers.

See:
Sadly, America, for all it's advancements in culture and philosophy, is still hindered, in many respects, by it's puritanical roots and beginnings. I'm not exactly sure if it specifically says in the bible that polygamy is sinful, but at some point or another, that became the commonly accepted belief of the catholic church, and while this country WAS settled to escape religious persecution, there was still the imperative to have SOME religious doctrine in place in an effort to control a population that otherwise would have run rampant in terrible decision making and stupidity.

Today, the idea of puritanically enforced polygamy is completely outmoded, but there's evidence to suggest that, scientifically, we're more geared to monogamy than not. Studies have shown that once a person is "in love" with another, they tend to not focus on others as much, they tend to be happier, have improved mental health, live longer, etc. etc. Is this true for everyone? No, not at all. Some people can be just as equally in love with three people as everyone else can with just one, but sadly, our social constructs tend not to favor the lifestyle minority in this country. I mean hell, it's 2016, and some states STILL refuse to recognize gay marriage.

>funding

Polytheism is a belief in many godlike beings such as the Hindu faith.
Speaking of Hinduism polygamy is pretty common in places like India, pic related

The most common moral argument against this practice is based on how inequal those marriages are in 3rd world countries. If someone immigrates from India to the State they bring that culture with them once its legalized

Religion is exactly why is should be illegal, but not the way you might think.

When the male-female gender ratio is about 50:50, and wealthier, more powerful men acquire extra wives beyond the first, fewer women remain available to other men.

This becomes a vicious cycle in which wealth is further concentrated is the hands of those relatively few men, while leaving huge numbers of other men unmarried, aimless, and sexually frustrated. It is a recipe for social instability.

If you want proof of this, go find me one state in which polygamy is legal that isn't an authoritarian shithole.

I'm all about letting people make their own choices about how to live their lives as much as possible, but here the state has a major compelling interest.

thats gotta be southeast asia, not india

How is it illegal? I'm in a polygamous relationship myself...

Isn't this a case of natural selection though? Men who do not possess the skills necessary to attract females won't breed while wealthy alpha innovators will

There's a number of problems I have with your argument.

One is the sheer numbers. There's 7.5 Billion people on the planet. The number of people who are financially well-off enough to "buy" multiple wives is nowhere NEAR enough to detrimentally affect the rest of the available population.

Two is how gender-one-sided it is. This line of logic assumes that ONLY women would be the multiple party, and there couldn't be an instance of a woman with multiple husbands to balance out the equation.

Three, this is also assuming that these unmarried men would have been guaranteed to find partners without polygamy. There are a LOT of single men and women in this world that have no interest in changing their relationship status.

And four: Half the people in this world who are wealthy enough to "buy" their wives like you seem to be suggesting, already HAVE a harem of girls. Human trafficking has been, is, and will be, a thing, pretty much forever, as shitty as it is. Most of these people already have a number of women at their beck and call, so this doesn't really change much of anything.

>some states STILL refuse to recognize gay marriage.
Faggot, we're talking about propagating the species, here, not eternal stagnation into extinction.

The problem is that it is socially destabilising. Large masses of young, unmarried, sexually-frustrated men are a major cause of revolutions and coups. Any state that does not want the government violently overthrown once a year must try to keep their numbers down.

States with large surpluses of such men usually try to get rid of them by sending off to die in wars.

>wealthy alpha innovators

kek

I'd rather have gays not producing than rednecks who are producing
/discussion

I thought we were talking about:
>Polygamy - Why is it illegal?

To which my answer was religious mindsets outliving their usefulness and how immoral it is, and used the lack of acknowledging gay marriage as an example of this damaging mentality.

Good job on completely missing the point, though.

Also, I'd really like to know how gay marriage is going to "stagnate the population into extinction" when every statistic and survey every taken shows that homosexual men and women make up less than 10% of any given population. If you think less than 10% of our population getting married is going to "lead to our extinction," then I can't help but laugh at you, especially since homosexuality has been proven to be genetic, and if there's any group of people least likely to pass on their genes, it's gay people.

So please, take a seat and explain to me how gay marriage is going to lead us to extinction, I'm legitimately VERY curious to hear your thoughts on the matter.

it's not biological, but the concept of marriage came along because it's better for everyone as more males have a chance with a female than say the few alpha males getting all the females

it's one of the defining characteristics of an evolved society, it wasn't just decided on some day a long time, it just worked out over time as our language, learning and security increased

polygamy is looked down on the western world because we left that aspect of our animal nature behind so long ago, just like we left behind marrying children and animal sacrifice

it might not seem like a big deal but if polygamy was the norm then we wouldn't have what we know as western society today

as for biology is concerned, you seem to be confused about human biology requiring polygamy, we're on our way to starving ourselves out with polygyny(1 man, 1 woman)

> settle for one womb
Settle for one pussy* --corrected it for you

> Our primary purpose is to reproduce
Are you telling me you think out goal is making more humans? Not making BETTER humans?
> This moron thinks the sandniggers and niggers with 12 kids who cant read or write or work are doing a grand ol job.

1) The problem always becomes more severe over time. The wealth disparity becomes greater as more children bring more earning power, more valuable social connexions and so on. Look at Saudi Arabia. Some of those sheiks have hundreds of grandchildren. One immense extended family owns most lf the country.

2) For complex social reasons, the one-woman-multiple-men scenario just never happens. It is almost unheard of, so no, it does not balance out.

3) Theis does not assume that. I said it makes it much more difficult for those men to find mates. This has no effect at all on those relatively few men and women who voluntarily choose celebacy.

Again, every single place in which polygamy is legal bears this out. They are all horrible places to live: Africa, the Middle East...

quantity breeds quality user, don't take sides in biological function because there is no right or wrong in nature

Well no, it means more gold diggers are going to breed which is bad for the population

85% of all cultures have practiced it, wtf I hate mormons now,

Seven-point-five billion people on a world of finite resource, and you're worried about there being too *few* children? We are breeding ourselves to death.

You know what happens when the deer population becomes too great for an area, right? Most of them starve to death. Humans are no different, except that we can see the diaster coming and avert it.

We need to convince people to have fewer children, not more for fucks sake. We are not an endangered species.

Yeah, we got a Rand fanboy here. There really aren't that many Elon Musks out there.

I don't really understand polyamory/polygamy. I'm married and I'm not interested in any other woman romantically other than my wife. I love her to death. But I still want to fuck other chicks. I don't think I'd ever do it though because the thought of my wife doing that to me behind my back would destroy me.

Is polyamory/monogamy hardwired into your brain?

you don't understand human society and history, user

betas don't just shrug it off and lie down, they rise up and kill, steal and fight when they don't get a piece of the action

gotta leave some pussy for us beta faggots
i'll settle for the leftovers

you're not a bird or reptile, user

the only thing that is hardwired into your brain is breathing, heartbeat and potential intelligence

the rest is cultural, learned behaviors

>but you don't have to marry someone to get them pregnant.

The problem with places like the middle east and the sheiks is more of a culturally-ingrained issue, however. They don't have the same culture, the same politics, the same... well, ANYTHING that we have state-side. There's no guarantee that it would become the same thing here. And again, a lot of those women are in the family of those sheiks against their will, or have been brainwashed into believing that's the ONLY purpose their life has, to make children. I bet you dollars to donuts that wouldn't happen here, if only because the feminazi's of this country would scream so loud about how bullshit that is, that the wealthy men wouldn't even want to try that, for fear they'd end up with a feminazi for a wife.

While it's almost unheard of, one-woman-multiple-men IS still a thing. I find it interesting that you think making polygamy legal would change society to the point where America becomes Saudi Arabia, but think that things wouldn't change at all for women.

And even in the case of the available populous, again, there's no guarantee that this system will make a dent in that. Women don't often like sharing their man with other women. The number of women who'd WANT a polygamous relationship would still be relatively small, so the gene pool is safe.

The problem with Africa and the Middle East is that life kinda sucks there regardless of their stance on marriage. You're confusion correlation with causality. It's not polygamy that makes those places shit, it's the fact that those places are shit that has lead to the other problems there, like slave brides, and hundreds of grandchildren.

Not true at all. Humans are instinctively far more than breathing. Humans are hardwired with many instincts, such as being herd animals, and all of the social instincts that come with that.