Turn on thread page Beta

V1242 - Multi-Spousal Marriages (Polygamy Legalisation) Bill 2017 watch

  • View Poll Results: Should this bill be passed into law?
    As many are of the opinion, Aye
    45.83%
    On the contrary, No
    39.58%
    Abstain
    14.58%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    V1242 - Multi-Spousal Marriages (Polygamy Legalisation) Bill 2017, TSR Liberal Party
    An Act legalising polygamy and the practice of multi-spousal marriages.

    [b
    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:- [/b]


    For the purposes of this Act-
    (i) 'Polygamy' refers to a single multi-spousal marriage of up to 4 individuals,
    (ii) 'Union' refers to multi-spousal marriages
    (iii) 'Legalise' refers to the removal of bigamy and polygamy related laws facilitating punishment for polygamy or bigamy,
    (iv) 'Multi-spousal' refers to a group of up to 4 people entering a legal union of marriage with the equivalent rights of traditional binary unions.
    (v) 'Coercive or controlling behaviour' refers to forceful behaviour which may raise suspicions of forced or unhappy partnerships.
    (vi) 'Public bodies' refers to register offices or other local authority-led ceremonies.
    (vii) 'Religious institutions' to non-governmental faith groups who object on moralistic grounds.

    1. Legalisation of Polygamy
    (1) It is legal to enter a single polygamous marriage of up to 4 individuals.

    2. Repeals
    (1) This Act repeals the following-
    (i) s.11(d) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
    (ii) s.57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861

    3. Implementation
    (1) The implementation of this Act should be the sole responsibility of the local authorities of the UK.
    (2) Violation of this Act by public bodies by refusing services should be punishable via a revoking of the registrar’s local authority-granted registrar licence for a period of up to 6 months.
    (3) All other international polygamous unions will be recognised by the UK government and will be deemed lawful after the independent assessment by a community support officer to ascertain the wellbeing of multiples wives and/or husbands. Immigration laws apply the same to these individuals as they do to married couples, they will not be disadvantaged by having multiple spouses.
    (4) Independent assessment by a professional community support officer should be used prior to the union to ensure coercive/controlling behaviour or forced marriage does not occur as a result of this Act.
    (5) Multi-spousal unions have the same legal rights as binary unions.
    (6) Children retain the two parents as everyone else but have a presumption of guardianship over them by the other individuals in the marriage if the parents are deceased or absent.
    (7) Applying current inheritance laws would mean all individuals in the marriage are considered next of kin and would benefit equally from intestate provisions if no will was made.

    4. Exemptions
    (1) Religious institutions shall be exempt from compulsory implementation of this Act.
    (2) Refusing services is acceptable if there is-
    (i) threatening behaviour towards the registrar;
    (ii) suspicion of coercive or controlling behaviour;
    (iii) timetabling or administrative issues.

    5. Commencement, short title and extent
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Polygamy and Multi-Spousal Unions Act 2017
    (2) This bill shall extend to the United Kingdom; and
    (3) Shall come into force 1st September 2017 following Royal Assent.


    Notes: The right to marry is a right everyone should enjoy with as little state intervention and restriction as possible. Archaic societal norms and religious teaching shouldn't restrict the freedom of others to marry who they choose and how many they choose. The secular state should reject these outdated ideas of religious union and instead provide multi-spousal unions to those who so desire them. It's not the state’s place to define, restrict or control love and who/how many people others choose to marry. Practical constraints (such as inheritance, cohabitation, taxation laws etc) mean a maximum of 4 individuals can marry into a single polygamous union.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    Good to see a liberal party bill going to division.

    Think something;s gone array in the formatting though cranbrook_aspie
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. A charter for men only.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. This bill furthers the rights of Sharia courts by allowing Muslims to legally marry up to 4 people as designated in their faith. This type of “marriage” is contrary to our nation’s historic values.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Nay. A charter for men only.
    I know several friends in poly relationships. None of them consist of one man with several girlfriends. That is one of the biggest myths of polygamy. I know one group with one girl and two guys, and another group where they all identify as non-binary. I also know poly lesbian and poly gay relationships.

    There is a fear of polygamy routed in the idea it is something for Islamic extremists who want Britain to be under Sharia law. This is so far from the truth of the matter, where there are many many people in polygamy relationships who are not Muslims, or even religious.

    I must have glanced over this bill in the house when catching up, but it has my support.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I know several friends in poly relationships. None of them consist of one man with several girlfriends. That is one of the biggest myths of polygamy. I know one group with one girl and two guys, and another group where they all identify as non-binary. I also know poly lesbian and poly gay relationships.

    There is a fear of polygamy routed in the idea it is something for Islamic extremists who want Britain to be under Sharia law. This is so far from the truth of the matter, where there are many many people in polygamy relationships who are not Muslims, or even religious.

    I must have glanced over this bill in the house when catching up, but it has my support.
    Exactly! This Bill isn't religously based or motivated at all.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Utterly wrong and I am disgusted that anyone can support this.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    Utterly wrong and I am disgusted that anyone can support this.
    What? You reckon individual freedoms are disgusting?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    What? You reckon individual freedoms are disgusting?
    Polygamy studies show that the practice objectifies women.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    You need only ask yourself: does the objectification of women really an increase individual freedom?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    Polygamy studies show that the practice objectifies women.
    Those studies are in less 'developed' cultures
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    You need only ask yourself: does the objectification of women really an increase individual freedom?
    It's not objectifying women! You can have one woman and 3 husbands or all women in the marriage.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harrisonpopple)
    It's not objectifying women! You can have one woman and 3 husbands or all women in the marriage.
    Elther way. It is still wrong. Marriage is between two individuals, no more no less.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    You need only ask yourself: does the objectification of women really an increase individual freedom?
    Could you present these studies? In any case, if what my liberal friend has just said is anything to go by it doesn't matter. This bill fundamentally allows individuals to enter such a relationship irrespective of gender and, extending from that, expanding individual freedoms.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    Could you present these studies? In any case, if what my liberal friend has just said is anything to go by it doesn't matter. This bill fundamentally allows individuals to enter such a relationship irrespective of gender and, extending from that, expanding individual freedoms.
    If the right honourable member had paid due attention to my points in the original debate, they would be aware of which studies I am speaking of. Because of such a reason, I will not be resending the study here.

    Individuals freedoms should only extend so far. This bill goes way too far and contradicts what marriage is meant to be. The union of two people. Not three. Not four.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    Polygamy studies show that the practice objectifies women.
    Perhaps they should come study my lesbian and gay friend who are in polygamy relationships, and others in similar relationships. They might get entirely different results which show the positive side of polygamy.

    Especially as the objectivism of women comes from the existence of patriarchy, not from polygamy/polygamy relationships. If you want to tackle female objectification this is not the right sword to fall on.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Perhaps they should come study my lesbian and gay friend who are in polygamy relationships, and others in similar relationships. They might get entirely different results which show the positive side of polygamy.

    Especially as the objectivism of women comes from the existence of patriarchy, not from polygamy/polygamy relationships. If you want to tackle female objectification this is not the right sword to fall on.
    Polygamous relationships are, as I've said, wholly wrong as are polygamous marriages. Marriage is meant to be the union of two individuals.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    If the right honourable member had paid due attention to my points in the original debate, they would be aware of which studies I am speaking of. Because of such a reason, I will not be resending the study here.

    Individuals freedoms should only extend so far. This bill goes way too far and contradicts what marriage is meant to be. The union of two people. Not three. Not four.
    That's rather irritating, but having looked at your study it very clearly states that communities with only polygamous marriages where men are allowed multiple wives were looked at coupled with the fact that most of those communities have fundementally different cultures making it not compelling enough. Beyond that, the 'union' argument was used to deny homosexual couples from entering marriages - presuming you want to stick to tradition - will you be presenting legislation to return to that state of affairs? Marriage is fundamentally a matter of choice and commitment - so long as individuals are consenting it shouldn't matter.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilhuff Tarkin)
    Polygamous relationships are, as I've said, wholly wrong as are polygamous marriages. Marriage is meant to be the union of two individuals.
    Then your argument has nothing to do with women being objectified, but everything to do with your perception of marriage. Meaning you are simply using women as pawns to argue against something you personally see as wrong.

    And as you consider it wrong, I would simply say, if you don't want a polygamous relit marriage, don't have one. But don't deny those who do simply as you disagree.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 12, 2017

2,867

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Articles:

Debate and current affairs forum guidelines

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.