General Discussion

lunatica

(53,410 posts)

17. The 'rules' would be different

Tue Jul 2, 2013, 06:56 AM

Jul 2013

sex itself would be a free choice option for the individuals as, in time, the age difference among the spouses would vary just as an extended family does today. Anyone marrying into the family would have to be accepted by the entire family. I think most people would opt to stay in the extended marriage as it would be far more stable and supportive of each individual within it. This includes the elder spouses and the youngest child.

Like I said, I've given it much thought. And I don't see any down side to it. If someone wanted out they could divorce their way out. Then they'd have to live with the family rules about child custody, property, etc.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I feel a need to spell-out the rebuttals to the gay-marriage slippery slope arguments. [View all] Deep13 Jul 2013 OP

Not to mention the obvious Notafraidtoo Jul 2013 #1

True about the contracts. Deep13 Jul 2013 #2

If you want an argument against incest Fortinbras Armstrong Jul 2013 #6

The test case for plural marriage customerserviceguy Jul 2013 #3

the idea of plural marriages involving both many men and many women intrigues me lunatica Jul 2013 #4

Perhaps. My concern would be that jealousies would tear it apart. Deep13 Jul 2013 #7

The 'rules' would be different lunatica Jul 2013 #17

The real issue of the slippery slope argument is that it's yet another way justiceischeap Jul 2013 #5

Where to draw the line for incest will always be judgement call. Deep13 Jul 2013 #8

You forgot one objection... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2013 #9

I've been flirting with a cute pencil sharpener. Deep13 Jul 2013 #11

Ow. Just...you know. Ow. Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2013 #15

What of the argument that Churches will be eventually required to marry people they don't want to?nt el_bryanto Jul 2013 #10

They are not required to do it now. Deep13 Jul 2013 #12

You can choose not to - but if you want to be married in a Catholic or Baptist or Muslim ceremony el_bryanto Jul 2013 #13

Sorry, but the 1st Am. protects institutional bigotry if it is religious. Deep13 Jul 2013 #14

Here's the answer to that customerserviceguy Jul 2013 #16