| Egann said: As far as personal relationships...knock yourself out. Actual marriages, however? Let me be blunt, NO. No, I don't support polyamory for any sort of legal privileges the way marriage does. It's difficult enough to have a marriage last with two people when there's only one relationship to worry about. Three people means three separate relationships, which means the whole affair is three times more complicated. If our divorce rate was less than 1% and a third person did something other than spice up the bed, I might change my opinion, but with it close to 50%? I will be generous and assume that polyamory will have the same divorce rate--we all know jealousy will make it markedly higher, but let's ignore that. That's a 13% chance there won't be a divorce. Let me rephrase that: if you have children, there's an 87% chance you will be giving them a highly stressful and potentially emotionally damaging experience. How is this not irresponsible and foolish? |
Would the divorce rate automatically go up though? Even if we assume there would be more jealousy (which I'm not sure of, if somebody is going into a polygamy then they must already know they have a higher tolerance of jealousy) what about other reasons couples divorce like stress caused by raising kids/earning income? If three or more people pooled their resources together and made decisions, financial hardships might be fewer and less severe. Also such couples might be more thoughtful and create contracts that explain how everything splits up (maybe make it a requirement?) Honestly, I don't think marriage should mean benefits, and all people who want to get married and be identified as ONE by the state should be required to construct at least a basic contract explaining what happens upon divorce. That includes two persons or ten.
