ALT Multiple Partners Poll

[Glen]

By request of Ward...

A poll regarding whether we should have forms of marriage involving more than two partners.

Check all that you believe should be allowed as marriages...

[Soyuz]

Marriage between only one man and one woman - standard
A man may have more than one wife - don't care, but history showed you have to be very rich at that time (tech level) to support more than one wife (family).

[Dave Howery]

:confused: Is this really an option at this time? We all came through with one spouse at most... some of you opted for none (you poor bastards)... how is anyone going to start up a harem at this point?

[Glen]

:confused: Is this really an option at this time? We all came through with one spouse at most... some of you opted for none (you poor bastards)... how is anyone going to start up a harem at this point?

Ask Ward, it was his poll idea...of course, MBarry might end up with one it looks like...:eek:

[Ward]

:confused: Is this really an option at this time? We all came through with one spouse at most... some of you opted for none (you poor bastards)... how is anyone going to start up a harem at this point?


Well I'm thinking long term . and we might as well get this hashed out now and not later . And there is one person that has posted that sounds like they are in a Multiple partner marage .

[Dave Howery]

Well I'm thinking long term . and we might as well get this hashed out now and not later . And there is one person that has posted that sounds like they are in a Multiple partner marage .
what'd he do, kill someone and take their wife? 'Cuz that's the only way he'll get one at this time... unless he goes trolling among the natives.. oh yeah, that'll endear them to us...

[Glen]

what'd he do, kill someone and take their wife? 'Cuz that's the only way he'll get one at this time... unless he goes trolling among the natives.. oh yeah, that'll endear them to us...

Actually, I think it was a female member of the board who shares her husband with his first wife, and insisted on bringing her as well as him, IIRC the case Ward is citing.

Do I have it right, Ward?

[Ward]

what'd he do, kill someone and take their wife? 'Cuz that's the only way he'll get one at this time... unless he goes trolling among the natives.. oh yeah, that'll endear them to us...


No they came over as a multiple marage . Plus they posted that they were come as such .

[Ward]

Actually, I think it was a female member of the board who shares her husband with his first wife, and insisted on bringing her as well as him, IIRC the case Ward is citing.

Do I have it right, Ward?



Yes you do Glen . But what happens when in 16 years down the road the children start turning 16 and there is an un equal amout of the sexs . What then . Also I know of only one female over eleven and under 16 and how many males in that age group are there .

[pisces74]

:confused: Is this really an option at this time? We all came through with one spouse at most... some of you opted for none (you poor bastards)... how is anyone going to start up a harem at this point?


Feces happens, we're not in the namby pamby 21st century, a good earthquake, wildfire, mudslide, tornado, tropical storm, native uprising, famine, pestilence, or civil war away from having a surplus of womenfolk.

[Forum Lurker]

Multiple marriage of any and every kind should be permitted, presuming that it involves competent consenting adults. I can't think of any legitimate reason to forbid it without recourse to Abrahamic religious traditions, and that's not a good way to start our legal system.

[Flocculencio]

Any combination is fine as long as all parties involved consent to it.

[Max Sinister]

If we allow a man to marry several women, we also have to allow the women several husbands... and since each of those partners may request several wifes/husbands for him/her, we could end up in a situation where all the community forms a super-couple - not that everyone is married to everyone, but that all the relationships form a big network where nobody is excluded?

Would that actually be good since it knits the community closer together, or would it be bad because it's too complicated?

[Soyuz]

If we allow a man to marry several women, we also have to allow the women several husbands...
Not so. Consider this scenario:
A (man) is married to B (woman) for several years. They even have kids.
However B starts feeling udevoted after some time and starts something with C (man).
Now, under that law, it will be perfectly legal for B to marry C at the same time without divircing A, even though she is now devoted to C!
When A find out, he might feel a *bit* pissed. And with a shotgun in every home, he might even try something.

So there you have a law that encourages women to abandon families for new husbands with absolutely no reprisal, and will be punishing the original dedicated husbands.

With man-more-that-one-woman, it's different. The women can sue that their husband isn't providing enough for them, which should be a law. Then the man can be punished by hard labour to take care of both of them. With women, well, they usually aren't the income makers here.

[Flocculencio]

Now, under that law, it will be perfectly legal for B to marry C at the same time without divircing A, even though she is now devoted to C!

Err...did you not read the caveat about all parties involved consenting to it? If this happens, A can definitely get a divorce.

[Matt]

Ask Ward, it was his poll idea...of course, MBarry might end up with one it looks like...:eek:


Heh! You need more then one woman to make a harem, and my sister is sure as hell not in that..

of course I've retconned a wife out, so you might be confused over that. Yay! Retconning!

[Hendryk]

One thing to keep in mind is that a multi-partner marriage isn't the same thing as a polygamous one. In a polygamous marriage, one spouse (usually a man) is married to two or more other people, but the latter aren't married to each other, and the situation is thus inherently unequal. In a multi-partner marriage (or whatever we'll call it), all the persons involved are married to each other, with all that implies in terms of mutual consent, shared responsibility, etc.

[Glen]

Any combination is fine as long as all parties involved consent to it.

I think, regardless of outcome, that will have to be a part of it.

[Flocculencio]

I think, regardless of outcome, that will have to be a part of it.

Yeah just wanted to emphasise that to rebut Soyuz's argument that the law would encourage "women to abandon families for new husbands with absolutely no reprisal, and will be punishing the original dedicated husbands".

[Forum Lurker]

Definitely thirding the idea that any plural marriage must involve the consent of all parties.

[Soyuz]

Err...did you not read the caveat about all parties involved consenting to it? If this happens, A can definitely get a divorce.
Hm, and what, get left supporting all those children? While the wife gets off with nothing?

That still makes it very easy to switch families.

[Othniel]

Hm, and what, get left supporting all those children? While the wife gets off with nothing?

That still makes it very easy to switch families.
Get rid of No Fault Divorce. We'll need to come up with a precedent when divorce is an exceptable action.

[Ward]

Get rid of No Fault Divorce. We'll need to come up with a precedent when divorce is an exceptable action.


I have to agree that no Fault Divorce is to easy of a way to get out of a marrage . I can see a divorce in the case of one or the other spouce beating the other , or the miss use of the children . But not because he or she snores , or she can't cook or other stupid things like that .

[Othniel]

I have to agree that no Fault Divorce is to easy of a way to get out of a marrage . I can see a divorce in the case of one or the other spouce beating the other , or the miss use of the children . But not because he or she snores , or she can't cook or other stupid things like that .
I was thinking an affair or abuse would be grounds to a divorce, but childern should be protected in any case. Multiple partner marriage may complicate things...

[MerryPrankster]

I was thinking an affair or abuse would be grounds to a divorce, but childern should be protected in any case. Multiple partner marriage may complicate things...

Yes, that would make things tricky.

Perhaps make it so joint custody is presumed unless there's clear proof of abuse. And perhaps bring along some DNA testing gear to clarify who is who's.

[NapoleonXIV]

You seem to be making all these laws based mainly on the idea that somehow women cannot support children by themselves??? The only law I see as necessary here is some sort of arrangement guaranteeing that small children cannot be abandoned by both parents.

Children past the age of 7 can and will probably have to support themselves vis a vis making some sort of contribution to the overall good equivalent to their food. Children will end up being raised mainly by the village in any case.

There shouldn't be any kind of marriage of any kind. That way you don't have to worry about divorce either. I thought polls had already pretty much established that anyone can have any consensual relations anyone wants with anyone. Since people can leave as they wish, how are you going to stop it anyhow?

We are surviving at present. I think we should rely upon de facto arrangements here until we have some idea of what kind of situations we are likely to run into, or we risk sacrificing needed flexibility.

Our main real long term problem here is where will our 2 and 3rd generation descendants get companions? Short of incest they can't get them from the village

Not to be bitchy or anything, but we all have devoted companions given us by the ASB's, this should be the least of our problems.

[Flocculencio]

Hm, and what, get left supporting all those children? While the wife gets off with nothing?

I don't understand. Why are you assuming that the wife gets off with nothing?

In the courts, a judge would have to decide what the responsibilities on each side are.

You seem to be working on the strange assumption that it is all or nothing.

[Glen]

Ha! Now NONE of the forms of marriage are 50% or greater. Does that mean we've outlawed marriage?

[Norbert]

Personally, I feel a Marriage is a personal choice. If people want to live together and work together for a future without being married, its up to them. If they want to be formal and marry, let them.

[Bulgaroktonos]

From a purely population standpoint, men having more than one wife seems to be the most intelligent. With one man and 10 women, you can get 10 kids. But with 10 men and one woman, you get only 1.

Perhaps we should let the courts decide......

It would be a good case to begin the courts job of defining our rights under law......

[jolo]

From a purely population standpoint, men having more than one wife seems to be the most intelligent. With one man and 10 women, you can get 10 kids. But with 10 men and one woman, you get only 1.

Perhaps we should let the courts decide......

It would be a good case to begin the courts job of defining our rights under law......

Problem is that 10 children with 11 parents will be poorer than 10 children with 20 parents. I see lots of costs for the community, which might lead to lots of pressure against any kind of large family.

Until our food production is high enough, we might better be a little bit more conservative. Sub-communities might decide differently, though.

[NapoleonXIV]

From a purely population standpoint, men having more than one wife seems to be the most intelligent. With one man and 10 women, you can get 10 kids. But with 10 men and one woman, you get only 1.

Perhaps we should let the courts decide......

It would be a good case to begin the courts job of defining our rights under law......

So now our mission here is to overpopulate the environment as quickly as possible? (and also to make genetic drift practically a certainty)

Come to think, What IS our mission here? Did the ASB's give any indication?:confused:

[jolo]

So now our mission here is to overpopulate the environment as quickly as possible? (and also to make genetic drift practically a certainty)

Come to think, What IS our mission here? Did the ASB's give any indication?:confused:

I'd less consider it a mission than a personal decision - whoever believes he shouldn't procreate won't, whoever likes to, will. I'm just against the community paying for bad decisions of others - at least until we are economically strong enough that we can sustain a few bad decisions.

[pisces74]

So now our mission here is to overpopulate the environment as quickly as possible? (and also to make genetic drift practically a certainty)

Come to think, What IS our mission here? Did the ASB's give any indication?:confused:

Our mission is survival, having a pop. spike insures more field workers, and a better chance of survival.

[Dave Howery]

there's a practical side to having a spouse and children too... we're being tossed into a medieval culture, more or less... no tractors, no power tools. Most of us will have to be involved in food production. You can't run a medieval farm by yourself... you really need the help. Your choices are a spouse and children (eventually) or hiring help, which most of us probably can't afford. Or slavery, I suppose, but I hope our new set of laws will outlaw that absolutely and completely....

[Dave Howery]

So now our mission here is to overpopulate the environment as quickly as possible? (and also to make genetic drift practically a certainty)

Come to think, What IS our mission here? Did the ASB's give any indication?:confused:
while your concern about overpopulation is noble, it's not really a good thing to focus on right now... in fact, we have the opposite problem.. we're underpopulated...

our mission: survive, change history, see what the world will be like if we survive, thrive, and jump start technology by 5000 years....

[Ghost 88]

So now our mission here is to overpopulate the environment as quickly as possible? (and also to make genetic drift practically a certainty)

Come to think, What IS our mission here? Did the ASB's give any indication?:confused:
this from a person who is taking AK 74s to the natives that will cause a lot more damage to the natives than our breeding will Our plans seem to allow for assimulation of the natives your plan is gonna get a lot of natives killed the tribe you give them to is regardless of your plans going to go after thier closest enemies first BOOM one dead tribe BOOM another dead tribe