Home > Mormons > More on Polyamorous Relations

More on Polyamorous Relations

In response to yesterday’s post on the FLDS, I received two of the most thoughtful and intelligent comments ever sent to this blog. (Read the post and the comments here.) Both were the kinds of testimonials I’d solicited, and hoped for, in writing the post.

One of the commenters is one of two men married to the same woman, in an egalitarian, non-religious “consent-based tradition,” and vivisected what he saw as my facile equation of the FLDS with polygamy. (Re-reading the post, I’d say I deserved the criticism.) It turns out  that “Polygamy  in America” (as the National Geographic article called its series on the FLDS) is far from the only example of  such relationships, and I repeated the error by examining the example without seeing it in a broader context of both polyandrous (two or more men, one woman) and polygynous (two or more women, one man) relationships. Moreover, polygamy and polyamory aren’t the same thing, either: the first refers to a marriage, the second does not.

The other commenter, one Seth R., is descended from early Mormons, only a minority of whom, he says, were polygamous. This commenter provided me with a quick education (and an offer of more information) on the LDS’s traditions, and on some of the more enlightened practice of Brigham Young. (These did not extend to enlightenment about race, it’s worth remembering; LDS long maintained racist view and practices, which have only relatively recently been renounced.) He also leveled informed criticism at today’s FLDS sect, which essentially amounts to this: Drive a practice underground and behind the walls of a compound, and don’t expect a healthy, consent-based society. (Am I the only one reminded of the Catholic Church here?)  If Seth R. is reading, I’d of course be interested in any other information you might send, and I suspect many of my readers would be, too.

This is exactly the kind of dialogue I was hoping to foster.

Categories: Mormons Tags:
  1. Michael
    March 15th, 2010 at 11:26 | #1

    I am in a Polymorous relationship… I am Married to a Woman, and We invited a Woman we deeply care for and her for us as well, into our relationship. We have major difficulty in locating support for our relationship legally. There was an Act. in 2004 that does not either explain the Legal Structure or arrangement of the relationship, as far as rights and aggreements thereof. There are not any explanations of Medical Coverage must be supported through your supporting State. My wife of course is covered under my policy, but, I must have aseperate policy for our Triad Partner, even Contractually.
    Please assist in this questionaire for Results Legally.
    Thank You,
    Michael, Jennifer, Tricia…

  2. March 15th, 2010 at 11:36 | #2

    This is why I believe that employers should give people a fixed amount of medical coverage, no matter their legal or other arrangements. Otherwise people are compensated differently for the same work.

  3. Michael
    March 20th, 2010 at 08:26 | #3

    John, Could you please, explain your theory of fixed medical coverage? A company is already fixed, wether, it is an 70/30 or a 80/20 like mine. Single, Spouse, of family. Right? I Think.

  4. Michael
    March 20th, 2010 at 08:52 | #4

    In Response to the Hegel Comment…Who is Hegel to comment Individual Sacrifice,(i.e. both of your children are in the burning house, you only have time to get one, Which One?)Sacrifice is measured by natural feelings created by god, and dedication to ones belief. Many has sacrificed their future for the sake of others. Jealousy is also very natural, Siblings fighting for attention from their parents.(He/She got more gifts.) Hegels beliefs, are communist, shallow, and ignorant to what we all are as humans. It is Natural, beautiful, and a comfort that hegel will never have the pleasure of understanding. I honestly feel sorrow for those who agree with this belief

  1. March 11th, 2010 at 04:50 | #1