Opinion of the "Polyamorous community"

[Mopsus]

So, if all consensual sexual relations are unimpeachable, then all consensual economic relations...?

[Mopsus]

So, if all consensual sexual relations are unimpeachable, then all consensual economic relations...?

What makes you think sexual relations are similar to economic relations?

That, apparently, the same logic underlies both.

So, if all consensual sexual relations are unimpeachable, then all consensual economic relations...?

What, like say, drug deals?

More like, people agreeing to work for eighty hours a week, in unsafe working conditions, for five dollars an hour. By what right does the government pass moral judgement on such an arrangement?

[Mopsus]

More like, people agreeing to work for eighty hours a week, in unsafe working conditions, for five dollars an hour. By what right does the government pass moral judgement on such an arrangement?

Because no doubt many people would find themselves with no other option but to enter into such poor work conditions/compensation.

And don't people sometimes submit themselves to relationships for reasons other than romantic attraction? I mean, let's be honest here: we don't think that Brigham Young could have procured 55 wives if he were just a blacksmith, do we?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Amusingly, I think that the opponents of polyamory would say the same thing about that peculiar institution.

[Mopsus]

And don't people sometimes submit themselves to relationships for reasons other than romantic attraction? I mean, let's be honest here: we don't think that Brigham Young could have procured 55 wives if he were just a blacksmith, do we?

They do, but not often to the detriment of their long-term well-being. Yes, you can pluck some examples from history or even recent history, but virtually every situation has outliers that are troublesome. What you're saying is basically the wholesale deregulation of the economy and to be honest I don't feel the need to say why that would be a terrible idea. It's not really even a proper equivalency here. You can't compare the crushing poverty the 99% would face in such conditions to a few people who want to engage in a polyamorous relationship...

Amusingly, I think that the opponents of polyamory would say the same thing about that peculiar institution.

I'm not really advocating for it, I'm just saying people should have the option and shouldn't be judged so harshly for it. Obviously I am not a fan of Warren Jeff-type situations where there is rampant abuse or what have you. It wouldn't be fair to compare all polyamorous relationships to that or other prolific cases of abuse.

So, the argument isn't one of principle, but one of consequentialism. In that case, you may very well be in the right: as long as polyamory remains a fringe of a fringe, it probably does harm than good to discriminate against it.

I just wish that people would refrain from invoking moral principles when they aren't willing to follow them to their logical conclusion.