You have failed to prove to me that polygamy causes harm to anyone.
A number of us have showed how it increases disloyalty and stretches the man’s resources thin, and encourages disparity between the sexes. You just skip by the arguments and land at the end zone saying “everyone has failed to disprove me” without any discussion of why we are wrong. Why are you doing this (as usual)?
Second, that when Adam took Eve to be his wife, he exhausted the entire supply of women available at the time. Rather, the idea of cleaving to one’s wife can be compared to the commandment to love one’s neighbor – there is no limit to just one, even though the text is singular in tense.
But this isn’t logical. You could say that Eve exhausted the entire supply of available men at the time, so not why reverse polygamy?
That is a long argument being presented but it doesn’t show that woman are comfortable with the idea of men having more than one woman. Like the paper said, men are biologically predisposed to have a lot of women, and women to have one faithful man. But how can a woman have one faithful man if he has a lot of women? I don’t see it. They are mutually exclusive, and unable to be fulfilled at the same time. A woman is only at loss when she has to compete for the attention and resources of one man. I don’t understand how the paper is making that huge logical flaw by saying polygamy fulfills both predispositions of the sexes, when it only favors that of the man.
And if we are to accept Jewish custom as ethics (rather than what Jesus tells us) then why aren’t orthodox Jews polygamous? They are right in the line of Jewish custom, so why don’t they practice polygamy?
And why have you consistently avoided many good arguments such as me showing you how the New Testament not supporting polygamy, how polygamy encourages disloyalty etc.?
I can accept that polygamy has been tolerable in the past due to a number of circumstances, but there is a reason, even if I’m not terribly good at spelling it out, why it is not natural in today’s society. I expect it has something to do with the same reason that incest has been tolerable in the past (after all Adam and Eve’s children must have committed incest by our standards), but is not considered natural or good today.
I also question why you exclude good arguments like incest/drugs, when the relevance is that you can use the same flawed logic to make any number of unethical things to be considered ethical.
I do agree that monogamy is unnatural and isn’t working in our society today, but that just means polygamy would function even worse, and be even more unethical, since a man and woman can’t even work out it out together, how does one man and multiple women work it out? It would increase unhappiness, not happiness, and therefore is unethical. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, tell me why this is wrong.
The only ethical way apparently is there for there to be no official relationship between mating partners. After all, animals don’t get married, do they?
I accept your argument that just because polygamy isn’t illegal doesn’t mean it’s unethical, but personally I don’t think even if polygamy were legal, that it would be exercised because simply it would increase infedility and unhappiness. As a woman, would you be willing to engage in polygamy? If yes, then why? If not, then why not? I can’t speak for the other sex, but like many of us have been saying repeatedly which you ignore just as usual, there doesn’t seem to be any benefit to the woman. A woman biologically benefits the most from one faithful mating partner, and by definition a faithful mating partner does not have other mating partners.
I will concede that I don’t care if polygamy becomes legal; for similar reasons I don’t care if gay marriages become legal. I wasn’t even aware polygamy was illegal. Like you said, there is no evidence it causes harm to society at large, and it would seem to be unethical to deny people the right to choose their spouse (s). But like I said, even if it were legal, it would not be ethical by the definition of it being the most happiness for the most people. If it were ethical, it would already be practiced by some major non-minority group somewhere in the world, considering there are so many different religions and non-religions you’d expect polygamy to thrive somewhere if it actually worked out well for the majority of people. If I were to legislate I wouldn’t ban polygamy, but that doesn’t mean I think it would work well for the most people.
I’m sure you can make up some cases like you’ve already done where polygamy works, but that does not work for most people. You have provided no compelling evidence that it would work for society at large, and thus have failed to prove it is ethical.