In what way is polygamy illeagal?

[Anonymous]

I understand it is illegal to legally marry one spouse and then get a state to perform a second legal (as opposed to religious) marriage while still married to the first.

But is it illegal to be legally married to one person and hold another person out as your second spouse? That shouldn't be illegal.

[Anonymous]

I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

[Anonymous]

Love is love is love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

I don't think anyone should be punished but I can see why the government might say to it's employees, you get to designate one person as the recipient of your benefits -- we aren't going to increase your benefits because you have more than one spouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love is love is love.

I'm asking about what the law IS.

[Anonymous]

Laws change all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

I don't think anyone should be punished but I can see why the government might say to it's employees, you get to designate one person as the recipient of your benefits -- we aren't going to increase your benefits because you have more than one spouse.

You get to increase if you have more than one child. How is that different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

I don't think anyone should be punished but I can see why the government might say to it's employees, you get to designate one person as the recipient of your benefits -- we aren't going to increase your benefits because you have more than one spouse.

Idk, they let you have as many kids as you want. Personally I see nothing wrong with polygamy. As long as it is consenting and everyone is an adult. I loved watching Big Love!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

I don't think anyone should be punished but I can see why the government might say to it's employees, you get to designate one person as the recipient of your benefits -- we aren't going to increase your benefits because you have more than one spouse.

You get to increase if you have more than one child. How is that different?

To get child benefits you have to have the actual child.
To claim spousal benefits, you only have to make the person your spouse legally even if it is only for the purpose of giving a friend benefits. No doubt there is some fraud on this front now but you can imagine the fraud we would have if you could claim multiple spouses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Laws change all the time.

And therefore there is no point in trying to understand what is the current law?

[Anonymous]

Apparently no one here knows the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either should be illegal.

I've always wondered how mistresses weren't polygamy?

But you can see for taxation and other benefits why the government might prefer to keep people in units of two adults. There are government benefits distributed to spouses of government employees, for example, and you don't want people pretending to be polygamous so they can get more benefits.

That doesn't support making social polygamy illegal.

Why should people be punished for being who they are?

I don't think anyone should be punished but I can see why the government might say to it's employees, you get to designate one person as the recipient of your benefits -- we aren't going to increase your benefits because you have more than one spouse.

You get to increase if you have more than one child. How is that different?

To get child benefits you have to have the actual child.
To claim spousal benefits, you only have to make the person your spouse legally even if it is only for the purpose of giving a friend benefits. No doubt there is some fraud on this front now but you can imagine the fraud we would have if you could claim multiple spouses.

No, I really can't imagine. Who would you be claiming as a spouse just for benefits?

[Anonymous]

brings new meaning to "friends with benefits"