Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Polygamy, legalisation of
Section E. Social, moral and religious

Polygamy is the practice of marrying more than one person at the same time. It is illegal in much of the world today, but it is recognised in various Islamic countries including Saudi Arabia and some African countries. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints officially ended the practice of polygamy (or plural marriages) in Mormonism in 1890, but splinter groups still practise it today and many people associate polygamy with the Mormon community.

Pros

[1] The government should respect freedom of choice. Nobody is forced into polygamy or harmed by its existence, and so the government should stay out of marriage and not interfere in people’s private lives. This is particularly true if polygamy is part of one’s religious practices, as with some branches of Islam. In this case, there would need to be a very strong harm to justify limiting religious freedoms and no such harm exists.

[2] Polygamy is a valid lifestyle choice. A marriage between three or four people may work very well. If someone falls in love again, it does not have to end a marriage — a larger, stable union can be created. It allows for roles to be shared out and takes the pressure off our busy modern lifestyles. For example, there could be two incomes in the family in addition to a full-time homemaker, which could improve everybody’s quality of life.

[3] Who says a marriage has to be between two people? That is an inflexible view. Many countries have moved away from the Christian definition of marriage being between one man and one woman by allowing gay marriage. This provides a precedent for a more flexible and modern approach to marriage. In addition, the Bible and the Qur’an both include examples of polygamous relationships, so the ’union of two’ is a cultural practice rather than a scriptural rule.

[4] If the government recognised polygamy, then all parties involved would acquire legal rights; otherwise, some people will be vulnerable. Where polygamy is practised outside the law, a second wife has no financial recourse in the case of a divorce or death. It is not illegal for a married man also to have a mistress and there can be no disadvantage in allowing this relationship to be legally recognised. Adultery is not preferable to polygamy.

Cons

[1] It is hard to confirm the consent of all parties in a polygamous relationship, especially the original wife. Because of this, we cannot be sure that we would be protecting freedom of choice rather than allowing a man to force polygamy on an unwilling wife. If the woman does not believe in divorce or has no resources, she may feel trapped and unable to object. In this case, the woman would be harmed.

[2] Women in polygamous relationships are likely to be less happy. This view of marriage is often misogynistic and supports the idea that it is the man’s needs that are important and women must serve him. In all societies where polygamy is practised (Islamic, Mormon, African) it is the man who takes multiple wives rather than the reverse. This concentrates all the power with the man and perpetuates outdated patriarchal structures in place of equal unions.

[3] Marriage by its nature is ’two becomes one’. Marriage is a religious concept and most religions are offended by polygamy, which they see as institutionalised infidelity. If polygamy is condoned, it dilutes the very idea of marriage. People can choose informal alternative lifestyles, but marriage as an institution should protect the security and equality of a union of two.

[4] It is very difficult to provide rights for multiple parties in a marriage. Who, for example, is next of kin? Imagine a situation where a decision had to be made whether or not to switch off a life-support machine: how could a law protect everybody’s rights here? In reality, one wife would have to be given precedent, which would undermine the role of any other wives.

Possible motions

This House would legalise polygamy.

This House believes that in marriage, ’two’s company - three’s a crowd’.

Related topics

Marriage

Gay marriage, legalising of