Polygamy is an acceptable practise in the modern world

First of a girl aged 10 is a minor, according to the law a minor does not have the requisite capacity to consent to such an act. You cannot compare a marriage between adults who have the life experience and maturity to understand the nature and consequences of a minor. With all due respect Con's example cannot be considered as you cannot equate polygamy to child abuse. A minor and an animal are entities who do not have the capacity to consent to marriage by virtue of their inability to understand the nature of marriage. As pro argued (and as Con has misinterpreted) acceptance of polygamy "does not create a situation where people would be allowed to so drastically change the definition of marriage" to the extent that innocent minor and animals could be essentially forced into marriage (as already stated they do not have the capacity to consent to such an act) Furthermore as i already stated the constitution of the U.S.A and most civilized constitution recognize a person's freedom of choice (as long as it is reasonable and cause no harm to another person). Prohibiting consenting ADULTS the right to choose to marry more than one man/woman is a direct contradiction of people's freedom of choice. We cannot allow marriage to underage girls, because they are NOT adults, they are underage, and it is the purpose of society and the law to protect those who cannot defend themselves, those vulnerable entities of society (for example minors). Therefore Con's counter argument is entirely invalid Scenario: "The marriage of a grown man between an underage girl does not really alter the definition of marriage if there is consent for example, so should this be accepted to then?" The operative word in the definition cited by Con is contractual relationships. Which means the laws regulating contracts apply. Minors generally do not have the capacity to enter contracts http://www.nolo.com... Therefore Con's scenario is invalid from the onset Pro respectfully seeks to ignore the real life cases cited by Con, because Pro could easily google real life benefits of polygamy and find a few examples, which would at the end of it all prove absolutely nothing aside from the fact that people have different opinions. These examples Con cites are entirely subjective "Leaves some men with no women to marry". There are roughly 7 billion people in the world, as Pro already argued not everyone gets married, furthermore even fewer are polygamous, therefore Con's argument about men running out of women to marry cannot be taken seriously as it is invalid in its entirety. "I was talking about cheating being shunned because you used the fact that cheating goes on all the time as a reason to allow polygamy countered this by questioning how that is a good argument for polygamy" Pro will reiterate his argument in simple terms. Cheating is shunned, it is dishonest Polygamy is not cheating, allows men/women to marry the spouses they desire to marry, therefore limiting the need for cheating In theory polygamy should help decrease cases of cheating (whether or not this is the case in practice is irrelevant, as Pro stated in THEORY) therefore according to this theory polygamy is good as it decreases the need to cheat "This argument is not invalid. As I said, Polygamy is MAINLY practiced in backwards countries where men are seen as the only breadwinners in society" Polygamy is practiced in these "backward" countries (as so eloquently put) on the basis of culture and religion The simple fact that these countries elect to manifest their cultural and religious beliefs (which are justifiable and reasonable) in their law does not make their legal systems "backward" For example Nigeria permits polygamy as it part of their cultural beliefs and religious beliefs ( "If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one" (Quran 4:3).), passed from generation to generation http://www.namywedding.com... In the Maldives polygamy is permitted upon consent of the first wife, which makes it even more acceptable because the first wife has a say in the matter, Pro fails to see how this law is backward considering the wife would have consented to the polygamous marriage to begin with. The same rule rings true in Iran, Malaysia and Singapore http://en.wikipedia.org... In another "backward" (sarcastically) country, Netherlands the idea of polygamy has been accepted. it is possible to have a civil union between 3 people. Please note that this is the first country that recognized same-sex marriages, another step in social reform http://www.brusselsjournal.com...