Non-Religious Polygamy

Dragonfly4253

New member
I am interested in the input of others on polyamory becoming polygamy. While I as a general rule could care less what anyone thinks about my partners and I being polyamorous, I hesitate at plural marriage. A portion of this is probably from the social stigma still ingrained in my brain from childhood but also because of the legal ramifications. I have never heard of anti-polygamy laws enforced in Wisconsin, but I also have never met any polygamists in Wisconsin.

Lovey and I were planning on marrying in the fall. Both because we love each other and because we have three kids in our blended family who do not have another parent (both of us are single parents with the exes being off the grid). So we have stepped up and are raising each other's children.

Lovey and Kitty have dated off and on for twenty years. She has three children by a different man who also is not in the picture (got caught abusing the kids). Lovey is the only stable male figure these kids have ever had since their BIO turned out to be a POS.

Kitty has expressed an interest in marrying Lovey as well. She is not interested in a legal ceremony so that wouldn't be an issue but she does want a marriage before god. I am not opposed to a ceremony expressing their love and union. I am more concerned about Lovey being arrested for being polygamous if people find out.

Kitty and I have a very good relationship and co-parent our brood very well so I have no qualms about her officially joining our family.

I guess I am just interested in other poly opinions or experiences with making it unofficially official.
 
You would have to look up bigamy prosecution in your state.

Where I am there is a huge drug problem amongst other things. The local judicial system isn't going to waste their time on my practicing polyandry.

Then again we are not using any social services for the government to have a reason to look twice at my family.
 
As long as you aren't trying to be legally married to two people you should be fine. Im married to Nate legally but I plan on getting married to sam as well (commitment ceremony )
 
As long as you aren't trying to be legally married to two people you should be fine. Im married to Nate legally but I plan on getting married to sam as well (commitment ceremony )

That is still considered bigamy and you can be prosecuted for it.
 
That is still considered bigamy and you can be prosecuted for it.

That depends on where you are I believe. We should all make sure we know the rules in our own jurisdictions.
 
In Wisconsin bigamy is only if you legally marry two people in the eyes of the law. However polygamy where one is not a legal ceremony is still illegal. It is under the same code as adultery and cohabitation. They are class 1 felonies. I know the law. It's never prosecuted in Wisconsin. I'm more asking about anecdotal experiences.
 
No anecdotes here, I just know that my V has been living in a "marriage-like" setting (cohabiting, did a commitment ceremony) for almost nine years and the Long Arm of the Law hasn't reached out to prosecute us yet. Of course ... we don't advertise our poly-ness ... almost none of our native family and friends know. Basically the only people who know are fellow polyamorists.
 
The law needs to change. Hopefully this issue will be next, once the Gay Marriage issue is settled (properly, in favor of them being allowed to marry), country wide (hopefully by SCOTUS, this year).

The thing I always found funny is... all the laws against Polygamy are Christian based.. yet polygamy (well, polygyny, anyway... but with our equal rights laws, that would naturally expand laws about it to include polyandry) is Biblically approved. There are something like a dozen different references to multiple wives in the Bible... and every single one is approved of. Not a single one is cast in a bad light.
 
The law needs to change. Hopefully this issue will be next, once the Gay Marriage issue is settled (properly, in favor of them being allowed to marry), country wide (hopefully by SCOTUS, this year).

I think transgender rights are next, going by what Obama said in the State of the Union address.

The thing I always found funny is... all the laws against Polygamy are Christian based.. yet polygamy (well, polygyny, anyway... but with our equal rights laws, that would naturally expand laws about it to include polyandry) is Biblically approved. There are something like a dozen different references to multiple wives in the Bible... and every single one is approved of. Not a single one is cast in a bad light.

Actually there is a ruling in the New Testament against polygyny.

1 Timothy 3: ...The overseer (bishop) then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher, not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not contentious, free from the love of money. He must manage his own household well and keep his children in control without losing his dignity. But if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for the church of God?

In other words, a man having more than one wife is a temptation to mismanage his household.

The ruling for the bishop was then extended to any church official and finally to any devout Christian, or any citizen of "the West," in the pro-chastity tenor of the current era.
 
Last edited:
I suspect Magdlyn is right, and we'll see transgender right as the next big push (which is great). Poly is a lot more legally complicated to get into the legal code, and I don't think we'll see much movement on it until well after we have equal rights to "dual" relationship marriages for everyone.

Not that I think that's great, of course, just reality. Honestly, I'm fairly "radical," I guess, in that I'd like to see legal marriage go out the door entirely.
 
I am legally married to DarkKnight and I am handfasting with PunkRock in May. In Maryland, just having a second ceremony is considered bigamy, even with no paperwork filed. So, we are traveling two states away to do it, where having the ceremony isn't illegal. I would absolutely legally marry PunkRock if I could, but not having that piece of paper doesn't change what is in my heart. I love both my husbands.
 
I have heard anecdotally that when there's a question of parenting children, getting legally married, technically divorcing, and then legally marrying another partner is a way provide paperwork and give some legal standing to the various parents in a polygamous relationship. And not run afoul of bigamy laws. It's also "easier" to explain to school officials and what not - 'yes, these are my kids, this is my second wife and my first wife'. (Most will assume ex's even if the legal paperwork isn't there, if you're just having a conversation, cause most people call their ex's similarly.)
I haven't done this; but it's been something Guy and Lee and I have discussed, in the unlikely event that she got pregnant, that he would want to be able to legally marry her.
 
Legally wed, technically divorce, then marry the other partner. Interesting way to tackle the problem; I kind of like it!
 
I think transgender rights are next, going by what Obama said in the State of the Union address.



Actually there is a ruling in the New Testament against polygyny.

1 Timothy 3: ...The overseer (bishop) then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher, not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not contentious, free from the love of money. He must manage his own household well and keep his children in control without losing his dignity. But if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for the church of God?

In other words, a man having more than one wife is a temptation to mismanage his household.

The ruling for the bishop was then extended to any church official and finally to any devout Christian, or any citizen of "the West," in the pro-chastity tenor of the current era.
I was aware of 1 Timothy 3, however... that, as it's written in the Bible, only applies to Bishops. It does not apply to "regular men". The Christian bias against polygyny has no Biblical basis/foundation as it applies to the "everyday man". Proof that it's got nothing to do with "everyday men" is that it also specifies "an able teacher" to be a Bishop. Other good, Christian men are not required to be teachers... good or otherwise. Christians conveniently forget this fact (that polygyny is Biblically supported).

ETA: forgot to comment on Transgender rights possibly being next. I disagree.... I consider the "general" transgender rights fight to be separate from the fight for marriage rights. Once gay marriage becomes legal across the board, in every state, transgender people will already be able to marry (monogamously) regardless of their body's physical sexual parts. I was only saying that when it comes to marriage, poly will be next.
 
Last edited:
I was aware of 1 Timothy 3, however... that, as it's written in the Bible, only applies to Bishops. It does not apply to "regular men". The Christian bias against polygyny has no Biblical basis/foundation as it applies to the "everyday man". Proof that it's got nothing to do with "everyday men" is that it also specifies "an able teacher" to be a Bishop. Other good, Christian men are not required to be teachers... good or otherwise. Christians conveniently forget this fact (that polygyny is Biblically supported).

;) So, I find it funny that a thread on non-religious polygamy is debating a religion's text...but I'll add to the fray.

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

The point of the verse is that a deacon must know how to manage a household well. The "one wife" clause is, at least, a minimum requirement. It establishes that deacon candidates must be married. Whether "one wife" is a "maximum" limitation or not depends on how legalistic you want to be.

Do you read this as one wife at a time?
In that case, a man who remarried after his first wife (children's mother) became a martyr could not be a deacon, although this second wife would clearly be an asset for managing his household.

A larger household would add to the deacon's credibility if it is well managed...so multiple spouses would actually lend toward a deacon's credibility just as much as (or more than) multiple children.

As I said, the interpretation depends on how legalistic you want to be - and the whole point of Christianity is not law for y'all, but grace in your face.

At any rate, is it not long overdue to distinguish between religious unions and civil ones? ;)
Society, via government, encourages healthy/cohesive family units with tax breaks because healthy/happy families make less crime, etc.
Corporations encourage healthy/cohesive family units with things like rate cuts because healthy/happy is a lower insurance risk.
And religions encourage healthy/cohesive family units for similar reasons (usually focusing on spiritual happiness and health).

But letting the church grant tax breaks or set insurance policies, makes as much sense as letting the government teach us which layer of heaven or hell (or reincarnation) we shall achieve after death. :D

I wish I could help the original question with at least one modern example of a marriage of more than two people, but such escapes me.
 
I was aware of 1 Timothy 3, however... that, as it's written in the Bible, only applies to Bishops. It does not apply to "regular men". The Christian bias against polygyny has no Biblical basis/foundation as it applies to the "everyday man". Proof that it's got nothing to do with "everyday men" is that it also specifies "an able teacher" to be a Bishop. Other good, Christian men are not required to be teachers... good or otherwise. Christians conveniently forget this fact (that polygyny is Biblically supported).

I don't know that it is "proof" of anything, Richard. Christians are a wacky bunch, and the Bible is so old and hard to parse... I think the statement that "if a man can't manage his own house, how can he hope to manage the house of God" could be read to apply to anyone, not just bishops. And obviously this is how it went. The Pharisees and early sages/rabbis in Judaism put a "hedge around Torah" and attempted, as laypersons, to live daily according to the rulings for the high priest on a holy day. This is what Christians later did as well. "We really want to avoid pissing God off. Let's live as carefully as we can to please him, to the highest standards he set up for his priests and bishops. (Maybe then he will bless us with lots of food, long lives, no enemies, and obedient kids! Oh and guarantee no eternal inferno while he's at it!)"

There are plenty of "legalistic" Christians out there. All I was attempting to bring up was that you sweepingly said there were absolutely no rulings against polygyny in the Bible. I pointed out one about bishops (overseers), Green Acres pointed out one about deacons (purse-holders) later in the chapter.

forgot to comment on Transgender rights possibly being next. I disagree.... I consider the "general" transgender rights fight to be separate from the fight for marriage rights. Once gay marriage becomes legal across the board, in every state, transgender people will already be able to marry (monogamously) regardless of their body's physical sexual parts. I was only saying that when it comes to marriage, poly will be next.

OK, understood.
 
Some polyfolk form LLCs or S-Corps, provide for each other with wills, custody agreements, powers of attorney, jointly owned property, medical powers of attorney, etc., as a way to gain some benefits but without crossing the line into bigamy/polygamy.

You may find the last couple of paragraphs in this article interesting: Up for Polyamory? Creating Alternatives to Marriage
 
Last edited:
My wife and I shared her best girlfriend for almost three decades. Our gf was considered as wife number 2. I think if it were possible to marry a third, we would have done so. What we did instead was go to Las Vegas where you can get any kind of ceremony and more if no license is required. We had a mock marriage of our gf to us and enjoyed a two week honeymoon afterwards. We never felt a need for official sanction. We were who we were and we neither told or denied our relationship. It is funny that despite the presence of our gf most times, no one thought that we are a poly triad. They just thought that my wife's friend visited a lot because she was single. That and the fact that my job relocated us a lot and our friends tended to be those in alternate lifestyles, made it easy to just be who we were.
 
Back
Top