Federal judge strikes down part of Utah’s ban on polygamy

[WinterBorn]

If you look at the prevalence of infidelity in today's relationships it gets clearer.

When someone cheats it is because they are missing something in the relationship. This is not necessarily a failure on the part of their partner. We are all wired a little differently and all need difference things.

 

[Rikurzhen]

I think an honest, poly relationship is better than many people realize.

Is it scalable and is it durable? No and no.

Not sure what you mean by scalable. Make it bigger? Sure.

Durable? I think it is as durable, if not more durable, than mono relationships.

If you have one partner, and you are not getting something you want or need, in poly you have an option. In a monogamous relationship you have none that are good for the relationship.

The trick is, can people overcome their jealousy or just not be jealous? Some certainly can.

The operative word is "some" meaning it's not really scalable up to society transforming levels. The research I've seen on open relationships is that they are not durable for the long run.

I get the feeling that your descriptions are too rooted in idealism, like you've analyzed the situation and come to the conclusion that this should all work in practice. If so, you need to contend with humans as they are, we're not really some new Soviet Man who can be engineered to specifications.

Back to the issue of jealousy. It can certainly be avoided in some situations and the trick is to learn to not give a damn. To have low investment in the relationship - this is what I've actually seen from college friends who thought they were breaking new paths. Why get jealous when you can walk away without much pain or grief. If you hold back, then you're not really committing to a relationship.

I disagree on the answer to the jealousy part. It is not about not being invested in the relationship. Quite teh contrary, it is about being very invested in the relationship. It is about being so invested and so secure that another person being involved does not threaten you. One couple I know has a woman with a few men she "dates". But her primary (in this case, a husband) know she loves him and knows he is not losing anything to her other "boyfriends". It is not just sex, because they all truly care for and about one another. It is simply a variation on the common relationship dynamics.

When you watch a motion picture and you see a person running your understanding is different from what you understand by looking at only one frame of the film. A static picture of an open relationship can present it as being very stable, but when you track all of the open relationships over a long time, you find them blowing up with high frequency. Even a theoretic approach explains why this will happen, which is that when you have more than two people involved you have the potential for shifting, or permanent, alliances which leave some partners isolated.

 

[WinterBorn]

I think an honest, poly relationship is better than many people realize.

Is it scalable and is it durable? No and no.

Not sure what you mean by scalable. Make it bigger? Sure.

Durable? I think it is as durable, if not more durable, than mono relationships.

If you have one partner, and you are not getting something you want or need, in poly you have an option. In a monogamous relationship you have none that are good for the relationship.

The trick is, can people overcome their jealousy or just not be jealous? Some certainly can.

The operative word is "some" meaning it's not really scalable up to society transforming levels. The research I've seen on open relationships is that they are not durable for the long run.

I get the feeling that your descriptions are too rooted in idealism, like you've analyzed the situation and come to the conclusion that this should all work in practice. If so, you need to contend with humans as they are, we're not really some new Soviet Man who can be engineered to specifications.

Back to the issue of jealousy. It can certainly be avoided in some situations and the trick is to learn to not give a damn. To have low investment in the relationship - this is what I've actually seen from college friends who thought they were breaking new paths. Why get jealous when you can walk away without much pain or grief. If you hold back, then you're not really committing to a relationship.

I disagree on the answer to the jealousy part. It is not about not being invested in the relationship. Quite teh contrary, it is about being very invested in the relationship. It is about being so invested and so secure that another person being involved does not threaten you. One couple I know has a woman with a few men she "dates". But her primary (in this case, a husband) know she loves him and knows he is not losing anything to her other "boyfriends". It is not just sex, because they all truly care for and about one another. It is simply a variation on the common relationship dynamics.

When you watch a motion picture and you see a person running your understanding is different from what you understand by looking at only one frame of the film. A static picture of an open relationship can present it as being very stable, but when you track all of the open relationships over a long time, you find them blowing up with high frequency. Even a theoretic approach explains why this will happen, which is that when you have more than two people involved you have the potential for shifting, or permanent, alliances which leave some partners isolated.

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

 

[Rikurzhen]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

It's been tried but no really big study that I'm aware of. Of the studies I've read every single one suffered from one hugely significant flaw - when a participating group (aka couple+) dropped out, that ended their tracking. The conclusions then focused on only those who remained. Well, arranged marriages would also look marvelous if we only focused on those couples who were both happy and still together. See what I mean?

What is really needed is to start with, say, 2,000 groupings, and then follow ALL participants for decades. Find out what happens to those who tried it and bailed and what effect it has on their subsequent relationships.

 

[Rikurzhen]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

I'm taking a different tack in this reply.

The problem with poly relationships is that they society-destablizing. Let's transfer the liberty-socialism argument from economic into the marriage realm. Modern marriage is very socialistic - very egalitarian. One woman for every man. Poly relationships are very liberty enhancing, winner take all. Seven women for one man who wins at this game and no women for seven men, creating seven bitter losers in this game. This is very destablizing to society - single men with no female anchoring them cause a whole lot of trouble. Look at what the Mormon cults do with their Lost Boys - they boot them out of their micro-society. How does that work, how is it scalable, to the broader culture? To which location would America boot all it's young boys?

 

[WinterBorn]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

I'm taking a different tack in this reply.

The problem with poly relationships is that they society-destablizing. Let's transfer the liberty-socialism argument from economic into the marriage realm. Modern marriage is very socialistic - very egalitarian. One woman for every man. Poly relationships are very liberty enhancing, winner take all. Seven women for one man who wins at this game and no women for seven men, creating seven bitter losers in this game. This is very destablizing to society - single men with no female anchoring them cause a whole lot of trouble. Look at what the Mormon cults do with their Lost Boys - they boot them out of their micro-society. How does that work, how is it scalable, to the broader culture? To which location would America boot all it's young boys?

First of all, I am not suggesting that poly relationships are for everyone. But then, neither is marriage.

The difference in the Mormon cults is that it was mostly arranged marriages. That is a polar opposite from what I am talking about.

Also, the poly relationship is more dynamic. It allows change without destroying the primary relationship. It allows both partners to enjoy the relationship without sacrificing what they need in their life. It also removes the entire problem of infidelity. Imagine if one not only didn't hide a new romantic relationship, but shared it with their partner. The suspicion, jealousy, and damage done would disappear.

As I have said, this is not for everyone. It takes someone without jealousy or at least willing to control it, to work.

I do not believe it would work for the majority of our society. But that does not mean it should be illegal for those who choose to do so.

 

[Rikurzhen]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

I'm taking a different tack in this reply.

The problem with poly relationships is that they society-destablizing. Let's transfer the liberty-socialism argument from economic into the marriage realm. Modern marriage is very socialistic - very egalitarian. One woman for every man. Poly relationships are very liberty enhancing, winner take all. Seven women for one man who wins at this game and no women for seven men, creating seven bitter losers in this game. This is very destablizing to society - single men with no female anchoring them cause a whole lot of trouble. Look at what the Mormon cults do with their Lost Boys - they boot them out of their micro-society. How does that work, how is it scalable, to the broader culture? To which location would America boot all it's young boys?

First of all, I am not suggesting that poly relationships are for everyone. But then, neither is marriage.

The difference in the Mormon cults is that it was mostly arranged marriages. That is a polar opposite from what I am talking about.

Also, the poly relationship is more dynamic. It allows change without destroying the primary relationship. It allows both partners to enjoy the relationship without sacrificing what they need in their life. It also removes the entire problem of infidelity. Imagine if one not only didn't hide a new romantic relationship, but shared it with their partner. The suspicion, jealousy, and damage done would disappear.

As I have said, this is not for everyone. It takes someone without jealousy or at least willing to control it, to work.

I do not believe it would work for the majority of our society. But that does not mean it should be illegal for those who choose to do so.

Actually it should be illegal. We don't let people drive down the wrong side of a highway just because they want to try it or because it will be a more efficient path to get them from A to B. Society is a balancing act between individual desires and societal desires. Driving the wrong way down a highway is good for one individual but bad for society. The problem with state recognition of poly is that it destablizes society. We already have enough of a problem with fragmented families, we don't need to be adding to the problem. Society is not some suicide pact where whatever one individual wants goes. The compromise here is what's operative now, do it outside of state sanction - people still have liberty to live as they please but society is not going to aid and abet that lifestyle.

To your other points, no I don't believe that Mormon relationships being placement marriages has any impact on what to do with "leftover men" aka lost boys. This is baked into the cake - when one man takes multiple wives, other men are left wifeless. Whether women are assigned or choose of their own free will, men are still left outside and mateless.

To your description of poly, it sounds all so logical and as I noted above, there are a lot of problems with these created constructs. The Left fricking does this all the time, they concoct some scheme which sounds fantastic in the abstract and then it blows up when put into practice (obamacare)

 

[The Rabbi]

Gee didnt the fags promise that gay marriage would not open the door to legalizing virtually every possible arrangement as "marriage", including incest? Yeah, they lied. Shocker.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Gee didnt the fags promise that gay marriage would not open the door to legalizing virtually every possible arrangement as "marriage", including incest? Yeah, they lied. Shocker.

They lied back in the day when the issue was non-discrimination against homosexuals and promised that such legislation would not be a slippery slope towards the gross notion of homosexual marriage.

They lied about Obamacare, saying if you liked your doctor you could keep your doctor.

They lied about the Civil Rights Act never leading to quotas or racial bean counting.

They lied with the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 promising that it would not alter the racial balance of the nation.

Lesson: Every time a liberal opens his mouth, he's lying. Liberal principles can never be sold simply on their merits. They can never make an honest case for what they believe, hence all the lying, trickery, and court-imposed outcomes. Who can blame them, if they were honest with the people, the people would never back their plan to destroy American society.

 

[WinterBorn]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

I'm taking a different tack in this reply.

The problem with poly relationships is that they society-destablizing. Let's transfer the liberty-socialism argument from economic into the marriage realm. Modern marriage is very socialistic - very egalitarian. One woman for every man. Poly relationships are very liberty enhancing, winner take all. Seven women for one man who wins at this game and no women for seven men, creating seven bitter losers in this game. This is very destablizing to society - single men with no female anchoring them cause a whole lot of trouble. Look at what the Mormon cults do with their Lost Boys - they boot them out of their micro-society. How does that work, how is it scalable, to the broader culture? To which location would America boot all it's young boys?

First of all, I am not suggesting that poly relationships are for everyone. But then, neither is marriage.

The difference in the Mormon cults is that it was mostly arranged marriages. That is a polar opposite from what I am talking about.

Also, the poly relationship is more dynamic. It allows change without destroying the primary relationship. It allows both partners to enjoy the relationship without sacrificing what they need in their life. It also removes the entire problem of infidelity. Imagine if one not only didn't hide a new romantic relationship, but shared it with their partner. The suspicion, jealousy, and damage done would disappear.

As I have said, this is not for everyone. It takes someone without jealousy or at least willing to control it, to work.

I do not believe it would work for the majority of our society. But that does not mean it should be illegal for those who choose to do so.

Actually it should be illegal. We don't let people drive down the wrong side of a highway just because they want to try it or because it will be a more efficient path to get them from A to B. Society is a balancing act between individual desires and societal desires. Driving the wrong way down a highway is good for one individual but bad for society. The problem with state recognition of poly is that it destablizes society. We already have enough of a problem with fragmented families, we don't need to be adding to the problem. Society is not some suicide pact where whatever one individual wants goes. The compromise here is what's operative now, do it outside of state sanction - people still have liberty to live as they please but society is not going to aid and abet that lifestyle.

To your other points, no I don't believe that Mormon relationships being placement marriages has any impact on what to do with "leftover men" aka lost boys. This is baked into the cake - when one man takes multiple wives, other men are left wifeless. Whether women are assigned or choose of their own free will, men are still left outside and mateless.

To your description of poly, it sounds all so logical and as I noted above, there are a lot of problems with these created constructs. The Left fricking does this all the time, they concoct some scheme which sounds fantastic in the abstract and then it blows up when put into practice (obamacare)

Comparing relationships with traffic patterns is a bit of a stretch. There is a reason we have cars on one side of the road. It is to save lives and prevent car accidents. There is no such vested interest in the area of relationships. Also, if you look back over my posts, I don't think I referred to marriage in post cases.

 

[Rikurzhen]

One of the biggest problems in relationships is a lack of communication. Whether it be about expectations, wants, needs, or even hopes, we have gotten very good at not communicating with our partners.

Considering the divorce rate in todays world, it is not surprising that other types of relationships fail as well. But i think there has been little valid research into the long term potential of poly relationships.

I'm taking a different tack in this reply.

The problem with poly relationships is that they society-destablizing. Let's transfer the liberty-socialism argument from economic into the marriage realm. Modern marriage is very socialistic - very egalitarian. One woman for every man. Poly relationships are very liberty enhancing, winner take all. Seven women for one man who wins at this game and no women for seven men, creating seven bitter losers in this game. This is very destablizing to society - single men with no female anchoring them cause a whole lot of trouble. Look at what the Mormon cults do with their Lost Boys - they boot them out of their micro-society. How does that work, how is it scalable, to the broader culture? To which location would America boot all it's young boys?

First of all, I am not suggesting that poly relationships are for everyone. But then, neither is marriage.

The difference in the Mormon cults is that it was mostly arranged marriages. That is a polar opposite from what I am talking about.

Also, the poly relationship is more dynamic. It allows change without destroying the primary relationship. It allows both partners to enjoy the relationship without sacrificing what they need in their life. It also removes the entire problem of infidelity. Imagine if one not only didn't hide a new romantic relationship, but shared it with their partner. The suspicion, jealousy, and damage done would disappear.

As I have said, this is not for everyone. It takes someone without jealousy or at least willing to control it, to work.

I do not believe it would work for the majority of our society. But that does not mean it should be illegal for those who choose to do so.

Actually it should be illegal. We don't let people drive down the wrong side of a highway just because they want to try it or because it will be a more efficient path to get them from A to B. Society is a balancing act between individual desires and societal desires. Driving the wrong way down a highway is good for one individual but bad for society. The problem with state recognition of poly is that it destablizes society. We already have enough of a problem with fragmented families, we don't need to be adding to the problem. Society is not some suicide pact where whatever one individual wants goes. The compromise here is what's operative now, do it outside of state sanction - people still have liberty to live as they please but society is not going to aid and abet that lifestyle.

To your other points, no I don't believe that Mormon relationships being placement marriages has any impact on what to do with "leftover men" aka lost boys. This is baked into the cake - when one man takes multiple wives, other men are left wifeless. Whether women are assigned or choose of their own free will, men are still left outside and mateless.

To your description of poly, it sounds all so logical and as I noted above, there are a lot of problems with these created constructs. The Left fricking does this all the time, they concoct some scheme which sounds fantastic in the abstract and then it blows up when put into practice (obamacare)

Comparing relationships with traffic patterns is a bit of a stretch. There is a reason we have cars on one side of the road. It is to save lives and prevent car accidents. There is no such vested interest in the area of relationships. Also, if you look back over my posts, I don't think I referred to marriage in post cases.

Sure there is. Compare social stability in the West to those parts of the world where polygamy is practiced. Frustrated young men with no women in their lives are a huge destabilizing force in society. Heck, look at black men in the US where blacks have one of the lowest marriages rates of any group.

 

[OnePercenter]

Polygamy doesn't necessarily mean orgies. But, especially as they get older, one woman is more likely to be able to keep two men happy than one man is likely to keep two women happy.

According to Charlie, an orgy requires a minimum of six participants
It goes….

• Masturbation
• One on One
• Threesome
• Two Couples Swinging
• Two Couples Swinging with a Lookie-Lou
• Orgy…six

I've found that more than a threesome you tend to get distracted and loose your place.

 

[OnePercenter]

When I get older I vote for two women keeping me happy.

I started at 40. When you take a break there's a show to watch.

 

[saveliberty]

Federal judge strikes down part of Utah’s ban on polygamy
KSTU ^ | 8/27/2014 | BEN WINSLOW AND MARK GREEN

A federal judge declared a portion of Utah’s polygamy ban unconstitutional late Wednesday, essentially decriminalizing polygamy in the state.

U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups ruled the phrase in the law “‘or cohabits with another person’ is a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is without a rational basis under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by reality TV polygamist Kody Brown and his wives, who left Utah fearing prosecution. They sued the state, arguing that the ban violated their right to freely practice their religion.

The ruling follows a similar order in December of last year that the judge took back while he decided the issue of damages. In the order, Judge Waddoups did preserve the phrases “marry” and “purports to marry” to “save the statute from being invalidated in its entirety.”

The judge also awarded financial compensation to the Brown family.

Read the ruling here:

(Excerpt) Read more at fox13now.com ...

Wait til they drop the person part...