This didn't take long...

I've started thinking - and I'm serious here, no joking - that there is a side to having multiple husbands/wives that makes sense today.

Economically, it may be beneficial. There are a lot of people today barely making it. If they had 2 or 3 more adults in the family unit, it could relieve financial stress (assuming everyone involved shares the same goal/plan).

Think about it. Regardless of the make up, when kids come... one of our very own gripes here is that nobody is taking time to raise and teach kids anymore. Well, if you had 3 adults working and 1 at home raising the kids, maybe this would get better. Moms and Dads wouldn't have to pay for child care - which is expensive from what I hear. Someone would be available to run errands during the week, take kids to Dr., get cars repaired, etc.. (less time away from work for the others).

Plus, it's generally cheaper to buy one big house than 2 or 3 smaller houses. I think it could work and be beneficial to todays broke, over stressed, no time to properly raise kids family. But I admit it could be a legal mess if one decided to leave (or the others decided to kick one out). But it would be interesting to see a family put my theory into practice and see if it works.

And all that aside... if everyone is a consenting adult, I say "why not?" It's not like anyone is staying loyal and making the traditional family unit work these days anyway.
 
9andaWiggle said:
I've started thinking - and I'm serious here, no joking - that there is a side to having multiple husbands/wives that makes sense today.

Economically, it may be beneficial. There are a lot of people today barely making it. If they had 2 or 3 more adults in the family unit, it could relieve financial stress (assuming everyone involved shares the same goal/plan).

Think about it. Regardless of the make up, when kids come... one of our very own gripes here is that nobody is taking time to raise and teach kids anymore. Well, if you had 3 adults working and 1 at home raising the kids, maybe this would get better. Moms and Dads wouldn't have to pay for child care - which is expensive from what I hear. Someone would be available to run errands during the week, take kids to Dr., get cars repaired, etc.. (less time away from work for the others).

Plus, it's generally cheaper to buy one big house than 2 or 3 smaller houses. I think it could work and be beneficial to todays broke, over stressed, no time to properly raise kids family. But I admit it could be a legal mess if one decided to leave (or the others decided to kick one out). But it would be interesting to see a family put my theory into practice and see if it works.

And all that aside... if everyone is a consenting adult, I say "why not?" It's not like anyone is staying loyal and making the traditional family unit work these days anyway.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Especially the part in red. Hell, my wife even told me that she wouldn't mind a sister wife with whom she could interact during the day when I'm working. She could help with the housework, the children, and the shopping. A win/win/win for all parties involved.

The key element is consent. If ALL parties consent to the union, what's the problem?

And we can't start with the 'slippery slope' argument that claims that people will be wanting to marry trees, cars, sheep (9~), or children; none of them can legitimately consent to marriage.
 
NOT JOKING. WHAT IF THE SISTER WIFE WAS A LESBIAN? WHAT IF THE WIFE WANTED A BROTHER HUSBAND? AGAIN, ALL WOULD HAVE TO CONSENT, BUT THE POSSIBILITY IS THERE FOR ALOT OF OPTIONS. AS I SAID IN ANOTHER THREAD, WHAT "IS" THE "LEGAL" AGE OF CONSENT? 9 DONT NEED NO PIECE OF PAPER.
 
WAMO said:
NOT JOKING. WHAT IF THE SISTER WIFE WAS A LESBIAN? WHAT IF THE WIFE WANTED A BROTHER HUSBAND? AGAIN, ALL WOULD HAVE TO CONSENT, BUT THE POSSIBILITY IS THERE FOR ALOT OF OPTIONS. AS I SAID IN ANOTHER THREAD, WHAT "IS" THE "LEGAL" AGE OF CONSENT? 9 DONT NEED NO PIECE OF PAPER.
Click to expand...

Ages of consent now vary among the states. They range from 16 to 18 and in some cases there are age gap laws in effect.
 
9andaWiggle said:
I've started thinking - and I'm serious here, no joking - that there is a side to having multiple husbands/wives that makes sense today.

Economically, it may be beneficial. There are a lot of people today barely making it. If they had 2 or 3 more adults in the family unit, it could relieve financial stress (assuming everyone involved shares the same goal/plan).

Think about it. Regardless of the make up, when kids come... one of our very own gripes here is that nobody is taking time to raise and teach kids anymore. Well, if you had 3 adults working and 1 at home raising the kids, maybe this would get better. Moms and Dads wouldn't have to pay for child care - which is expensive from what I hear. Someone would be available to run errands during the week, take kids to Dr., get cars repaired, etc.. (less time away from work for the others).

Plus, it's generally cheaper to buy one big house than 2 or 3 smaller houses. I think it could work and be beneficial to todays broke, over stressed, no time to properly raise kids family. But I admit it could be a legal mess if one decided to leave (or the others decided to kick one out). But it would be interesting to see a family put my theory into practice and see if it works.

And all that aside... if everyone is a consenting adult, I say "why not?" It's not like anyone is staying loyal and making the traditional family unit work these days anyway.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I'm thinking. As long as all the adults involved agree to the family unit, why shouldn't they be entitled all the benefits that a family receives. Why should a second wife (or husband for that matter) not be covered under a group family insurance policy, why should only one spouse be allowed to decide what medical care should be given or allowed to visit a gravely ill family member?

Those are some of the arguments made by SSM proponents and they also apply to multi-adult households, these people face the same consequences that gay couples faced, they should get the same protections under the law.
 
THATS WHAT I MEANT IN ANOTHER THREAD G. NOW THAT THEY HAVE LEGALIZED GAY MARRIAGE, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SET A STANDARD FOR LEGAL CONSENT AGE. ANOTHER CAN OF WORMS AS YOU SAID.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top