# Polygamy advocacy **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 1, 2021, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-advocacy/934011 "2021-03-01T06:47:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 53
**Author:** ![Strassia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Strassia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strassia)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2021, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-advocacy/934011/53 "2021-03-02T19:00:27Z")
I started a thread on this topic almost a decade ago. I started it because of a hijack in another thread about how if refusing to change marriage laws to allow SSM had no rational basis (constitutionally speaking) than not changing laws to allow polygamy would also have no rational basis. I disagreed due to the fact that no one could even tell me at that time how the laws would need to change. For the same reason, I disagree with the OP here that polygamy is in the same position as SSM for the same reason I disagreed back then. Morally and ethically I have no problem with it. Decriminalizing polyamorous living situations and modifying other laws not to directly discriminate are things I support. Deal with the abuse issues as abuse issues. Many of them are also present in some two person marriages. But SSM was a simple change. Remove the gender specific wording, and presto everything works just fine. Multipartner marraiages (MPM?) are not so simple. I stand by the challenge I made 10 years ago. Come up with a model that works for almost all forms of ethical MPM that does not fundamentally change the current marriage laws or put an undue burden on the family court system to deal it. I am obviously not in charge, but I would vote for said law if it met the following conditions: - Had broad support from the people who want the various types of polygamy. - Was equitable to all concerned - Did not change existing marriage laws extensively. Add things like stricter age limits would be fine, but I really don’t want to have to go to a lawyer and put all the current protections my family has in a contract or lose them. > [@Rational basis for not recognizing polygamy](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rational-basis-for-not-recognizing-polygamy/585741): > > This it to move an interesting hijack from [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13923815) thread. No state in the union grants marriage licenses for more than two people. I contend that this is a rational position. First, I see nothing inherently morally wrong with polygamy. Fraud and coercion can occur, but that is true of other marriages as well. I know that as a practical matter most communities that practice polygamy in the U.S. have serious issues, but those mostly happen because it is an underground institution. I should not… > [@Rational basis for not recognizing polygamy](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rational-basis-for-not-recognizing-polygamy/585741/34): > > In theory I agree with you. But it will make things much more complicated. In those other countries divorce is easy because the man can just tell any of his wives they are divorced, give her the mandated payment, and decide who gets the kids. He doesn’t even need a court, just say it publicly three times. Suppose here we do it so anybody can marry and consensual adult in any arrangement. You could end up with a five person group (gender doesn’t matter) with A married to B and C, B married … --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-advocacy/934011)._