= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Konkvistador comments on Poly marriage? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (127)
Adapting the law on man-woman unions to also cover man-man unions does not involve any technical hurdles on the legal side, it's just applying existing laws in a slightly different context.
Marriage with more than two people, however, would require many changes to the text of the law (except in places where the law already covers polygamy).
We have changed the legal traditions and practices surrounding man-woman marriage (especially with regard to divorce and child custody) far more in the past 80 years than would be required to make poly marriage workable.
Downvoted for "Disingenuous". If you disagree with a point, it is generally better to just counter it, than to accuse the commenter of making it in bad faith.
ETA: Downvote removed, following removal of the accusation.
I've dropped the word, I agree it was inappropriate.