Justify whether polygamy should be allowed or not?
486483
Yes. More than one wife was allowed even in the bible.\n\nIn the old testament, if a man's brother got killed, you would be going him honor to marry his wife also and provide for both.\n\nIn the new testament, it did not really say it was wrong, it only said that minsters could only have on wife due to their other church duties.\n\nPolygamy in the Bible though was out of love and compassion though, not lust.\n\nOther cultures is also open to it.\n\nIf two can become one, than certainly three can become one....my wife would just love to have another women to share the joys and responsibilities with...she told me so.
800020
I expect that if the issue of polygamy once again re-enters the political arena (after 200 years of being out of it), most people, whether Republican or Democrat, will oppose it.  It's not even on the radar these days so I don't think you should be worried about it coming to the forefront.
804476
There is a 14 year age differance between my husband and I. He was married when we met. We all decided to try polygamy because I love him and he loves me and her and couldn't lose either one of us.
585427
Absolutely it enforces one religion's viewpoint upon everyone. And how far we go in allowing that is a valid question.\n\nLaws protecting children, and preventing marriage to children, are for the benefits of children. That is a non-religious interest that outweighs any specific religion's belief that marriage to 12-year-olds should be OK. The secular (non-religious) reason outweighs any religious preference, and the burden is slight. So the general rule (no child marriages) still holds. Opening up marriage to same-sex couples is absolutely no threat to that. \n\nPolygamy/polyamoury imposes significant legal complications, relating to property division and taxes. Personally, I don't think voluntary (voluntary, not compelled) polyamoury should be allowed as long as the adults involved have taken sufficient steps to clearly define what happens to their property in the event of divorce or death. Why? Because the default rules are set up for two-person marriages, and the default rules don't work in multi-person marriages. Remember, opening up marriage to same-sex couples is still monogamy, and doesn't require changing the rules to allow more than two in the marriage. \n\nHomosexual marriage doesn't suffer either of these problems. The rules for two-people marriage work just as well regardless of the gender of those involved. And if an adult man or woman is capable of deciding who they want to marry, then the gender (or race) of that other adult is none of the government's business. \n\nWhy shouldn't the government get involved in the decision? Because the gender of the other spouse has absolutely no effect on any secular (non-religious) interests or laws, and prohibiting same-sex marriage does not serve any legitimate secular government interest. Every current law and every current social policy supporting monogamy works just as well regardless of the gender or race of the people involved in the marriage.\n\nIf certain religions don't want to support homosexual (or interracial) marriage, that's absolutely their choice. Nothing can compel a minister to perform a religious marriage ceremony that he/she doesn't think is valid according to his/her religious beliefs. \n\nBut the state or federal governments should not be enforcing religious beliefs about what adult voluntary monogamous marriages are valid based on race or gender. The country has figured out the first half of the obvious truth, and it's just a matter of time for the other half.
684904
Polygamy is against the law.  The government has every right to disfranchise them.\n\nRegards,\n-Jim
738876
There isn't a real one. One of the arguments made by opponents of same sex marriage is that allowing it could open the door for other things, such as acceptance of polygamy. It's baseless and primarily a tactic by the morality police (Conservative Christians) to keep people under their reigns.
1009664
I am not actually quite convinced that being widows and orphans are the right reason to marry them in order to save them from their sad predicament. This is quite an illogical reason to  justify multimarraige or polygamy. During wars, we cannot expect only about 20 or 50 or a hundred widows and orphans? There will be thousands. So, it's just beyond my comprehension that if it was really the reason, then why only chose 6 or twelve and leave the rest.  In my own honest opinion,  help can always be extended to these people without the benefit of marraige because making someone your wife is not a prerequisite to an act of extending help or assistance. That makes some of them fortunate than those who were not chosen or never had the chance to be chosen. Meaning there will always remain grieving widows and orphans. So if widows and orphans are the main concern of those who survive wars, then all of them should be given equal treatment and not only the selected few.  Doesn't this logic satisfy or justify the act more than reason?
110212
I think i would stay single, however, not because of the polygomy.  I have no problem with multiple wives or husbands for that matter.  If everyone in the union is treated equally and have the same imput and respect for the others.  It can be an eriching experience for all involved including the children who have mulptiple parents to love, care for them, and ipart their knowledge and experiences.  My problem would be being the second or third wife, I am to opionated and out spoken.  I would stay in trouble for adding my two cents worth at the wrong time.
988884
An interesting question...with so many contentious answers.\n\nPolygamy is made into a moral issue by the multiple religious institutions around the world...and the laws against polygamy are rooted more in religious reasonings than ones based in economical or societal ones.  The laws could be changed....but it would take a super-majority of US citizens to do so, and it's highly unlikely that the religious right would ever allow such an event to take place.\n\nOne wife is more than enough for me personally...but I say if you're man (or woman) enough...who am I to say differently. \n\nJust my 2 cents worth.
434719
Polygamy is a very controversial issue when it comes to marriage and the fact is it is not for everyone it take a very selfless woman to share her relationship with another man but the fact remains many monogamous American men cheat on their woman hence our huge divorce rate . There is also the fact that we don not live to solely please one person we live to please our creator with the growing number of the women population versus the male population this is a valid solution for a man to support and care for these women and children also let me inform you this is not about sex or the man feeling like a king with so many women it is about his position as a man to protect his female counterpart as Allah has made him protectors and providers to us.  People in this society are very closed minded to this idea because they only focus on the sexual nature of the arragement if they take the time to learn the responsibility of taking on this very charitable task  they would admire it and not see it as a weird practice.
877003
Since there are civil benefits to marriage, morally, it must be open to all.\n\nno one has a monopoly on marriage - certainly no one religion - although religious institutions do have the right to set their own internal rules, they should not be in a position to forbid others to do so.
688983
The last answer is completely true. Whatever religion you might happen to be, polygamy is a punishable crime in Turkey. To be accepted legally, all marriages must be performed by a civil servant (not an imam) and they will run a background check to make sure you are not married. Where it happens that people have more than one wife, only one (if any) are legally accepted as such and can claim benefits, etc. In any country in the world, you can live with several women 'as your wives'; there is nothing a government can do to stop that.\n\nI'm not an expert on the Ottoman Empire, but I believe that, as Muslims at the time were subject to a legal system based partly on Shariah, Muslims would have been able to take more than one wife. That's just a guess. But certainly forbidding polygamy was one of the first acts of the modern Turkish Republic.\n\nAnybody who tells you differently is just talking out their a......
183892
first off, thats not polygamy. And unless everything is on the table its not polyamory. What you are doing is cheating unless you have permission from your wife. If you don't have her blessing? You're an idiot playing with dynomite
226858
try search all the engines you can on the web with the key words "polygamy" and "law", sorry i cant help, i haven't looked much into the subject!
722105
Think on this:\n In Neveda Prostitution is legal; Polygamy is illegal.\n Prostitution is immoral, but legal;Polygamy is moral, but illegal.
569196
First of all DNA , you tell me can all women afford to pay for DNA ? in all countrys ? of course not.\n\nWomen emtionally cannot handel 4 men nor physically, this would mean she has to have sex atleast 4 times a day everyday with each man, lets say they al like sex twice a day then thats 8 times a day, and the womans body cannot stand this, read the medical reports of prostitutes and thier wrecked cervix's\n\nWhen is Polygamy allowed in Islam? \n\nThe sections of this article are: \n\n- When is polygamy allowed in Islam? \n- What was the purpose of Noble Verse 4:3? \n   - The way I read Noble Verse 4:3. \n- Why didn't Allah Almighty directly prohibit polygamy? \n- Why then did Prophet Muhammad practice polygamy? \n- Can anyone be absolutely fair? \n- Too much illiterate and starving kids damage the society and Islam. \n- What if the person is rich and can afford polygamy? \n- Conclusion. \n\n\nMarriage from multiple women in Islam might not be allowed for those who might result in damaging the society with their marriage by bringing more illiterate, poor, and in many cases starving children to the society.\n\nLet us look at Noble Verse 4:3 "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice." Notice how Allah Almighty orders men to be either fair to their wives or never marry more than one wife.\n\nLet us look at Noble Verse 4:129 "Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."  Here we clearly see that Allah Almighty tells men that they will never be fair to their wives.  \n\nLet us see why then Allah Almighty temporarily ordered polygamy but yet very highly discouraged it, and why I personally believe from the Noble Quran that polygamy should not be allowed today to most Muslim men in the Muslim world.\n\n \n\nWhat was the purpose of the Noble Verse 4:3? \n\nNoble Verse 4:3 was revealed to Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him in Madina after he migrated to it from Mecca and established an Islamic state there right after the battle of Uhud in which the Muslims not only had lost badly against the Pagans, but also suffered a dramatic decrease in the number of Muslim men.  The Muslim men before that battle were approximately 700.  They became only 400 after the battle.  This loss had left so many Muslim women (1) Widows, and (2) Not able to get married if they were single. \n\nTo make matters even worse, the Muslims had faced yet another battle against the Pagans in Mecca and its neighboring tribes who wanted to attack the Muslims in Madina to finish off Islam once and for all, and by the Jews and the Christians in Madina who betrayed the Muslims in the "battle of Trench" after signing a defense treaty with Muhammad peace be upon him against the Pagans.  \n\nAll praise due to Allah Almighty.  With Allah's Will and Mercy, the Muslims had miraculously won the battle against the Pagans of Mecca and drove them back to where they came from, and then attacked the Jews and the Christians who betrayed the defense treaty and kicked those hypocrites out of Madina forever! \n\nThese continuous battles against the Muslims were very costly in terms of Muslim men's lives.  The women had to be taken care of one way or another.  For this reason, Allah Almighty had revealed the Noble Verse 4:3 to Muhammad peace be upon him to solve the social problems that the Muslims were facing.  That is why at the very beginning of the Noble Verse 4:3 we see Allah Almighty setting a conditional clause for Orphans
882708
I personaly dont like the fact that my man would be doing ANYTHING with another person but me. Its just not right why be married if its to more than one person. \nI just think that it is wrong. There should only be one person you love at a time that is what makes love such a strong thing. It can keep people together for years. \n\nBut we have people who want to tarnish that with their polygamist ways....i think that if you dont want to commit you shouldnt be in a relationship at all. You should just be single...whats the matter with that. You cant have your cake and eat it too.