Polyamory (having more than one sigifcant other) is morally wrong

I hate when my opponents decide to take something I said wildly out of context. Let me clarify that the "actual system" to which my opponent is referring is not the only system, and his is a case of quote mining to the extreme. What I actually said (minus the paraenthesis), was, "the origin of morality is not needed in this debate , the actual system we use is." meaning not that we need to decide on which one way of morality is the only and true way, but we do need to decide on a system to use for this debate. The 'actual system' is just that, and only that. P1: Regardless of if it matters or not, the bible is an awful moral standard And let's, just to get the whole bible thing settled, point out that any moral system that points out the disgusting morality of the bible is automatically better. Whether or not morality is moral, I think we can agree that mass genocide, rape, murder, and oppresion of all non-Isrealites (men, women, and children) in the book of Joshua was immortal. I think we can agree that a god that would smite and massacre people for deviating in the very slightest, very most minor offense is wrong. The gross immortality of the bible is nearly universal, so any system of morality that points this out to the bible is inherently a more reliable source for morality than the bible itself. I think we can agree that stoning, burning, and murdering people for straying slightly off the norm (you know, eating shellfish or wearing linen and cotton or working on Sunday) is morally wrong. Clearly, because we would view these things as wrong, and these things are COMMANDED in the bible, the bible must not be a good source of morality, for it orders you to commit and approve things that you know are wrong. P2: Even if it wasn't awful and disgusting, morality cannot come from the Bible Besides, there is the whole Euthyphro dillemma[1] that proves that the bible cannot be the source of morality. It goes something like this: Is something good because God commands it, or does God command something because it is good outside of him. If it is the former, than God could command murder and genocide and rape and it would be moral (which he does). If it is the later, than there is a moral code without God for which god gets his morality, and therefor the origin of such morality cannot be with God and the Bible. P3: Morality is a concept, but we use systems to explain it and utilyize it Morality, you are correct, is the concept of right and wrong. However, we are discussing which system of morality, which ideology about how to best approach what is right and wrong, would be the best for this debate. And if you can't prove anything moral or immoral, as you suggested (which I am going to pretend like you didn't), than polyamory cannot be immoral. Problem solved. I win, polyamory cannot be morally wrong. But, for the sake of debate, we are going to ignore that. Defense of my P2 There are two ways of looking at this. First, you may factor in the animals who, of course, would probably be more unhappy than the rapists were happy. We have no way to prove animal happiness or unhappiness, so we generally, if factoring in animals, use harsh and realistic pain, discomfort, or pleasure, as opposed to emotions. Because the displeasure of the animals (presumably) would be great, I doubt greatly that the rapists would raise happiness more than the animals loss happiness. Or, you could look at it without factoring in the animals, in which there is nothing inherently wrong about bestiality. Which, if the animal's well-being doesn't matter, who is to say that there IS anything wrong with it, because the animal doesn't matter. Not that I agree with this, I would factor in the animal's well-beings, but neither disproves Utilitarianism. Defense of P3 If we currently have no system for which to base morality, than nothing can be inherently moral or immoral. Because of this, I would accept that, under CURRENT conditions of the debate, which are subject to change, polyamory is neither immoral nor moral. Since it cannot be immoral, it cannot be morally wrong, an therefor the debate falls in my favor. Other Moral Systems I am just going to mention a few moral systems[2] and why, in all of them, polyamory is acceptable: Hedonism: Because the participants of polyamory get joy, it is morally right. Libertarianism: Because people are, in the end, free to do anything that doesn't harm anyone, polyamory is neither moral nor immoral. Cultural relativism: Because polyamory is approved by the majority of the population, it is morally right. Kantian: Because polyamory is not irrational, it in neither immoral nor moral. Rights-based: Because the people in a poly relationship clearly do not consider it immoral, it is morally right. Poyamory is not wrong. 1. http://www.str.org... 2. http://home.sandiego.edu...