Polygamy -- one view : eventually dangerous for a society

[alfreda89]

Here's a article on why polygamy is not something to be lumped into the "gay marriage" debate. In fact, the author suggests that single sex marriages can stabilize a society, while allowing one man multiple wives (polyandry, one woman, several husbands, is almost extinct in the world) guarantees that some men will never marry -- and an unmarried young man is a candidate for wars, gangs, etc.

This column is dated today, so look fast. From the article:

"So far, libertarians and lifestyle liberals approach polygamy as an individual-choice issue, while cultural conservatives use it as a bloody shirt to wave in the gay-marriage debate. The broad public opposes polygamy but is unsure why. What hardly anyone is doing is thinking about polygamy as social policy.

If the coming debate changes that, it will have done everyone a favor. For reasons that have everything to do with its own social dynamics and nothing to do with gay marriage, polygamy is a profoundly hazardous policy."

http://nationaljournal.com/rauch.htm

Comments

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

Well, I just deleted my reply while trying to check the definition of something, drat it. But the major gist of it was, I could actually see more stability in this model -- but only if the stigma of married vs. unmarried, children vs. childless no longer existed at any age. I can tell you that when a woman nears fifty, she is invisible to any man who doesn't know her personally -- just for an example.

Of course, stability vs. actual individual happiness don't necessarily have to be the same thing. Unless you take the constitution literally.