Res Ipsa wrote:DT, there is not a uniform view of polygamy or polyamory among feminists.
Not saying that all feminists think same. There are loud feminists that strongly oppose the legalization of prostitution, and those same feminists probably oppose polygamy as well.
"On Monday, the National Organization for Women joined other local groups and a representative for Gloria Steinem to oppose legislation that would decriminalize sex work in New York"
"In a 2013 piece for Reason, Melissa Gira Grant, an author and senior staff reporter at The Appeal, cited Melissa Farley, a longtime anti-sex work advocate and researcher who has summed up her camp's position by calling sex work "paid rape.""
Res Ipsa wrote:DT, there is not a uniform view of polygamy or polyamory among feminists.
Not saying that all feminists think same. There are loud feminists that strongly oppose the legalization of prostitution, and those same feminists probably oppose polygamy as well.
"On Monday, the National Organization for Women joined other local groups and a representative for Gloria Steinem to oppose legislation that would decriminalize sex work in New York"
"In a 2013 piece for Reason, Melissa Gira Grant, an author and senior staff reporter at The Appeal, cited Melissa Farley, a longtime anti-sex work advocate and researcher who has summed up her camp's position by calling sex work "paid rape.""
I sometimes get the impression that some of the more extreme feminists are completely asexual and fundamentally opposed to any kind of sexual activity or pleasure, whether legal or consensual or not.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
In what way does divorce infringe on the rights of children?
How can you even ask such a dumb question? What child is not devastated when divorce happens and they lose a parent?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
In what way does divorce infringe on the rights of children?
How can you even ask such a dumb question? What child is not devastated when divorce happens and they lose a parent?
Last time I checked divorce does not kill any parents. In fact when one or the other remarry they gain a parent or two :). While divorce can be hard on some children, you still ignore the issue of what harm may result in 2 people staying together that don't want to.
Now why should a child have the right to force their parents to stay married?
Last time I checked divorce does not kill any parents.
No it just makes it a lot more difficult for one parent to remain a part of the child's life. It's kind of sad but I've had friends whose father wants nothing to do with his biological children because he's already moved on to a new wife and new children, probably similar to how a father's attention moves on to a second wife and children in polygamous marriages. There's only a certain amount of time, attention, and money. The children from a dead marriage have a tendency to be forgotten. Who wants to remember such an ugly experience?
While divorce can be hard on some children, you still ignore the issue of what harm may result in 2 people staying together that don't want to.
I do see harm in that. Some people in fact most people sadly, just aren't good spouses. It'd be interesting for me to know how many more second and third marriages work out after the first one doesn't. Not only do you have the same people with the same character flaws as the first marriage you have the extra weight of the baggage from the past relationship.
Now why should a child have the right to force their parents to stay married?
I think every child deserves to have the natural love and connection of a biological parent. Sometimes that's not possible due to death or legitimate and inevitable reasons for divorce. But nowadays it's more common than not. Often times the parents never even marry before or after having children. It's undeniable that the breakdown of the family and our serial monogamous culture has had some very negative effects on the children who inevitably get shortchanged by the situation. Divorce is a very selfish thing that we take far too lightly in our mainstream American culture.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:...divorce happens and they lose a parent?
...divorce does not kill any parents.
spoken like a kid whose parents are still married.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
ajax18 wrote:I think every child deserves to have the natural love and connection of a biological parent. Sometimes that's not possible due to death or legitimate and inevitable reasons for divorce. But nowadays it's more common than not. Often times the parents never even marry before or after having children. It's undeniable that the breakdown of the family and our serial monogamous culture has had some very negative effects on the children who inevitably get shortchanged by the situation. Divorce is a very selfish thing that we take far too lightly in our mainstream American culture.
I don't have any serious argument with the above. It is too often true.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
ajax18 wrote:No it just makes it a lot more difficult for one parent to remain a part of the child's life.
Sure.
It's kind of sad but I've had friends whose father wants nothing to do with his biological children because he's already moved on to a new wife and new children, probably similar to how a father's attention moves on to a second wife and children in polygamous marriages. There's only a certain amount of time, attention, and money. The children from a dead marriage have a tendency to be forgotten. Who wants to remember such an ugly experience?
While sad that is not the norm.
I do see harm in that. Some people in fact most people sadly, just aren't good spouses. It'd be interesting for me to know how many more second and third marriages work out after the first one doesn't. Not only do you have the same people with the same character flaws as the first marriage you have the extra weight of the baggage from the past relationship.
People who have various problems tend to be more likely to divorce then those who don't have those problems. That doesn't mean we should force them to stay married, and we certainly shouldn't forcing those who find out about a spouses problems would have to remain with them. Making and breaking relationships with who we like is a fundamental right. Take that away and you lose almost all freedom.
I think every child deserves to have the natural love and connection of a biological parent.
Deserves yes, but it is not a right. We cannot force love, and divorce itself does not destroy that love.
