1) The poll's introductory statement mentions the United States by name (if not specifically binding it to the poll, it at least infers this meaning). However that is moot, as I live in the states, thus have no grounds for discussing the political or social acceptance of such things elsewhere. Such allowances are a geo-social issue, and not the forum to be imposed by any one form of government.
2) The poll questions the government recognition of marriage among multiple partners. As for historical precident, polygamy is more prevalent in times of famine, class systems, extremely unbalanced gender numbers, or high children mortality. It's a method to quickly seed a new generation. However, in a society that has roughly the same number of men and women and a lack of other inclusions, it has the possibility of limiting available people. For absolute, a contract drawn between two persons offers more chance of mutual agreement as to the terms and interpretations (since no disagreement wil lbe anything more or less than 50% of the parties involved). Not to mention that there are only 24 hours in the standard day, and we humans live a finite existence. By the very factors involved (among happy, healthy couples at least), a polygamous marriage does not have the time and energy spent, per individual, that a monogamous marriage. And lastly, polygamous marriages have a history of abuse by certain religions group(s) associated with a state.
3) The trust and bond available to two healthy, happy people bound in marriage cannot be experienced by three people. Simple mathematics: Hours / People = Hours / Day.
Note: to dispell any questions about my religious bias, let it be understood that I am for all practical purposes an atheist. And certainly not a Christian.
no subject
2) The poll questions the government recognition of marriage among multiple partners. As for historical precident, polygamy is more prevalent in times of famine, class systems, extremely unbalanced gender numbers, or high children mortality. It's a method to quickly seed a new generation. However, in a society that has roughly the same number of men and women and a lack of other inclusions, it has the possibility of limiting available people.
For absolute, a contract drawn between two persons offers more chance of mutual agreement as to the terms and interpretations (since no disagreement wil lbe anything more or less than 50% of the parties involved). Not to mention that there are only 24 hours in the standard day, and we humans live a finite existence. By the very factors involved (among happy, healthy couples at least), a polygamous marriage does not have the time and energy spent, per individual, that a monogamous marriage.
And lastly, polygamous marriages have a history of abuse by certain religions group(s) associated with a state.
3) The trust and bond available to two healthy, happy people bound in marriage cannot be experienced by three people. Simple mathematics: Hours / People = Hours / Day.
Note: to dispell any questions about my religious bias, let it be understood that I am for all practical purposes an atheist. And certainly not a Christian.