# Polygamy: The Answers **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 15, 2012, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274 "2012-07-15T03:06:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/81 "2012-07-15T19:13:06Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > I can easily not post in blue if that is a problem. As for cites, I don’t see anyone else citing much of anything, but it you want me in particular to produce cites for everything I say, I guess you just don’t want me on here. Nobody else is asserting anything. You don’t have to cite a question. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/82 "2012-07-15T19:20:43Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > **NO, that is just your opinion** , and it only has the value I give it, and I give it zero value. As for your deluded mind, you can think whatever nonsense you want, with my blessing. I care nothing for what any Heathen or Democrat thinks, and address nothing to them, and hope to teach them nothing at all. I speak only to Conservative Believers and only have interest in them. Telling another poster he or she has a “deluded mind” is an insult that is out of line for this forum. Do not do it again. Claiming to speak only to a limited audience is the sort of thing that should be engaged in a blog. This site is not for posting blogs.\* Speaking only to “Conservative believers,” (particularly in the limited fashion that you appear to define the term), means that you have a potential audience in this forum that can be numbered on two hands with fingers left over, so you are wasting your time. [/Moderating] - [ > [@](#): > > The board is not intended to furnish you with a forum for promoting your personal agenda. We reserve the right to ask you to limit postings on a particular topic, or to refrain from posting on such topics altogether. ]([SDMB registration agreement as of 12/21/2014 - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=650726)) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/83 "2012-07-15T19:21:41Z")
Besides which, while there were one or two facts in the OP, there were an awful lot of factual errors and we are here to fight ignorance, not promote it. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/84 "2012-07-15T19:22:11Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > I speak only to Conservative Believers and only have interest in them. Even Jesus knew his calling was to the sinners, not the saved. To be fair though, you never claimed to be a Christian. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/85 "2012-07-15T19:27:52Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > **Finally, bigotry is the total enemy of great debate,** defined as “holding an opinion ignorantly.” That is a pretty poor definition of bigotry. A better defintion would be to hold an opinion to the exclusion of any other views or evidence–much like making assertions that can be disproven and then failing to support the reasons why one holds to those errors. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/86 "2012-07-15T19:34:09Z")
You seem to be married to a lot of vague generalizations. ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/87 "2012-07-15T19:40:07Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > \*\*EVERYTHING is not all blue. \*\*Only my posts are blue, because I like them that way. They look nicer, and they stand out a bit, but not too much, and I can more easily find and separate my writing from that of all others. > > **It takes me time and effort** in order to make my posts more readable, nicer to look at, and so forth. I contribute that labor to the site. I also always try to punctuate, spell and write clear sentences out of respect for the other posters, and myself, and what I say. > > 🙂 TEST ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/88 "2012-07-15T19:44:40Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > …the navy blue text is annoying because it makes it harder for people to quote your posts without a bunch of broken code. What do you mean by broken code? I test-quoted one of the blue text posts (reply# 87 to this thread) and I do not see anything broken. I don’t see anything otherwise annoying about the blue text format either. ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/89 "2012-07-15T19:47:56Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > EVERYTHING is not all blue. Only my posts are blue, because I like them that way. They look nicer, and they stand out a bit, but not too much, and I can more easily find and separate my writing from that of all others. > > **It takes me time and effort** in order to make my posts more readable, nicer to look at, and so forth. I contribute that labor to the site. I also always try to punctuate, spell and write clear sentences out of respect for the other posters, and myself, and what I say. > > 🙂 TEST And if you don’t want the quote to be blue it takes about 5 seconds to delete the formatting tags. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/90 "2012-07-15T20:06:27Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > **Also, we need to understand there are tens of thousands, of Polygamous Families** out there in our country and working fine according to all reports and I am not talking about FLDS gated commmunites either. I’m talking about in every city, town and state in the union. As you will not cite, I will simply say that there are not tens of thousands of polygamous families out there in our country. There are not even hundreds. I am, of course, entirely correct. Therefore, you will agree with me. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/91 "2012-07-15T20:10:57Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > I am, of course, entirely correct. I even found a cite for you: > [@E-Sabbath](#): > > There are not even hundreds. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/92 "2012-07-15T20:26:48Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > Sorry, I won’t post anymore, as I just can’t do that. But, thanks for the time I was here. Nobody’s saying you should go away. I, for one, am rather interested in your views, even though I am in total disagreement with them. It doesn’t mean that we can’t have a good spirited debate, so long as we’re abiding by the rules and conventions here of backing up what one claims, not directing insults at each other, and sometimes even agreeing to disagree. But it is bad form to join a board and then basically believe that you are exempt from the rules and customs that we practice. I don’t go into your home and put my feet up on the furniture; it’s rude to join this forum and reject our standards of behavior (such as providing cites when asked for). I actually hope you stick around. Personally, I’m very curious if you yourself are in a plural marriage. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/93 "2012-07-15T20:31:58Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > As for your deluded mind, you can think whatever nonsense you want, with my blessing. I care nothing for what **any Heathen or Democrat** thinks, and address nothing to them, and hope to teach them nothing at all. I speak only to Conservative Believers and only have interest in them. Lucky guess, or has he been reading my posts? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/94 "2012-07-15T20:36:47Z")
> [@FounderChurch](#): > > **YES, they are very different** , Same Sex “Marriage” is always bad and negative with no redeeming social values, while Plural Marriage is always a positive with lots of redeeming social values. Au contraire, mon cher frere. The list of negatives with Plural Marriage is huge. Lemme get my blue on. Ahem: **The list of plural marriage negatives is enormous**. For one it will cost the economy at least a few hundred billion dollars a year. That is economic. **And it will help overburden our immigration** by allowing men to bring multiple wives in, along with their relatives, so it opens another door to large numbers of immigrants. \*\*And there is the increase in expensive diseases \*\*that are related to polygamous sex practices. **Don’t get me started on all the negatives involved in plural marriage**. It deserves a thread of its own. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/95 "2012-07-15T20:58:05Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Supposedly it’s illegal in South Africa, but the president has multiple wives. Naah, it’s perfectly legal, under the [Recognition of Customary Marriages Act](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Recognition_of_Customary_Marriages_Act,_1998). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/96 "2012-07-15T21:12:05Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Naah, it’s perfectly legal, under the [Recognition of Customary Marriages Act](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Recognition_of_Customary_Marriages_Act,_1998). Does this in any way restrict plural marriage to “indigenous African peoples of South Africa”? It also seems that polygeny is allowed but not polyandry, although it’s not fully clear. What is clear, is that there are different provisions for the wife and the husband. Is that because “customary marriages” were never polygenous? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/97 "2012-07-15T21:55:23Z")
And since SSM is legal in South Africa, it would seem odd if polyandry were not ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/98 "2012-07-15T22:19:52Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Really, the issue I see holding back polygamy that may not be answerable is economic. There are simple and straightforward answers for dissolution of marriage via death or divorce. The courts have dealt with it. But there’s no quick and simple path for government to deal with a situation where a spouse dies and the marriage carries on. Or where a divorce occurs but the marriage continues. That’s not to say that such couldn’t be adopted over time. But it would require some true legislative work. And I don’t think American society is ready to take the time right now. > > Question: Is there any liberal democracy that allows plural marriage? I’m not aware of one but I’d be interested in hearing how it copes (if it does). India, by far the most populous liberal democracy in the world, permits polygamy for Muslims under Sharia law, which is very patriarchal concerning women. [Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, s.2](http://www.lawyersnjurists.com/resource/legal-documentations-litigations/laws-of-bangladesh/1930-1942/the-muslim-personal-law-shariat-application-act-1937/) > [@](#): > > 2.Application of Personal Law to Muslims.-Notwithstanding any customs or usage to the contrary, in all questions (save questions relating to agricultural land) regarding intestate succession, special property of females, including personal property inherited or obtained under contract or gift or any other provision of Personal Law, marriage, dissolution of marriage, including talaq, ila, zihar, lian,khula and mubaraat, maintenance, dower, guardianship, gifts, trusts and trust properties, and wakfs (other than charities and charitable institutions and charitable and religion endowments) the rule of decision in cases where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat). Liberal democracies such as Canada, Australia, and England, do not permit polygamy, but they have laws in place to equitably deal with the failure of polygamous relationships, including polygamous marriages of people who find themselves in these jurisdictions. Australia: [Family Law Act, s. 6](http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00487/Html/Text#_Toc326931425) > [@](#): > > 6 Polygamous marriages > For the purpose of proceedings under this Act, a union in the nature of a marriage which is, or has at any time been, polygamous, being a union entered into in a place outside Australia, shall be deemed to be a marriage. Ontario: [Family Law Act, s. 1 (2)](http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90f03_e.htm#s1s2) and [Children’s Law Reform Act, s. 1 (2)](http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90s26_e.htm#s1s2) > [@](#): > > In the definition of “spouse”, a reference to marriage includes a marriage that is actually or potentially polygamous, if it was celebrated in a jurisdiction whose system of law recognizes it as valid. Ontario: [Children’s Law Reform Act, s. 21 (1)](http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c12_e.htm#s21s1) > [@](#): > > A parent of a child or any other person may apply to a court for an order respecting custody of or access to the child or determining any aspect of the incidents of custody of the child. England: [Matrimonial Causes Act, s. 47 (1)](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/18/section/47) > [@](#): > > A court in England and Wales shall not be precluded from granting matrimonial relief or making a declaration concerning the validity of a marriage by reason only that the marriage in question was entered into under a law which permits polygamy. In family law, it all comes down to the court finding a solution that is in the best interest of the child, and provides equitable child support, spousal support and property division. That already happens in very complicated matters that do not involve formal polygamy, but do involve multiple parties in blended relationships that change over time. Adding formal polygamy to the legal mix is no big deal. What concerns me is promulgation of a religious based set of laws that subjugate women. Shariat and fundamentalist Mormonism force women into subservient roles, and these religions hold to polygamy. I hope that plural marriage is legalized, however, only on the condition that very careful constraints are in put in place to reduce the harm caused to women by religious based laws and religious practices. It’s a pity that polygamy has been tied to these religions, such that to avoid the problems caused by the religions, it may not be possible to legalize polygamy for those who wish to practice it without violation of the basic human right to equality. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/99 "2012-07-15T22:23:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Does this in any way restrict plural marriage to “indigenous African peoples of South Africa”? No, Muslims can get them too, AFAIK. > [@](#): > > It also seems that polygeny is allowed but not polyandry, although it’s not fully clear. I don’t think it’s ever been tested. If it were the Constitutional Court would be forced to allow it ,or else strike down the Act, because gender equality is enshrined in the Bill of Rights > [@](#): > > What is clear, is that there are different provisions for the wife and the husband. Is that because “customary marriages” were never polygenous? I think so, but like I said, it’s never been challenged. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274/100 "2012-07-15T22:24:06Z")
Where is The Grapist when you need him? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-the-answers/628274.md?page=6)