(July 9, 2015 at 12:39 am)Esquilax Wrote: So, here's where I'm coming from, in the interests of full disclosure: for much of my adult life, I have been polyamorous. Not at present, but most of my significant romantic attachments came as part of a group relationship with three other people and an orbiting collection of other, less serious partners.
The point is, I have experience with this stuff, which is why I don't see any particular reason to stop polygamous unions, assuming they aren't in any way gender segregated. Yes, the laws would have to get more complex to suit this, but not as much as people might think. By and large, those partnerships willing to go the distance and seriously commit like that already have a lot of experience working out the minutia of their relationships on their own, up to and including the skullduggery associated with marriage. It's a labyrinthine process just being in a poly group, and that tends to weed out the less serious ones on its own; I see Steel asking if 40 people could get married on the first page, and I gotta tell ya, that's unfeasible. That ship will sink real quick; too many people, too many individual relationships to manage, something will break and the whole thing will crumble.
To be honest, I think mine was the largest poly group I've met (eight regular members, four serious romantic partners included in that) and even something like that drifted apart in the end. This idea of armies of people marching down the aisle together just isn't gonna happen.
Thanks for the honesty and the insight.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh