Talk:Polygamy in Australia

Untitled

It must be noted that Polyamous marriage is accepted in Australia under the Family Law Act 1975. Which states :

FAMILY LAW ACT 1975 - SECT 6

Polygamous marriages

For the purpose of proceedings under this Act, a union in the nature of a marriage which is, or has at any time been, polygamous, being a union entered into in a place outside Australia, shall be deemed to be a marriage.

Thus entering in to Australian laws is a justification and allowance of Polyamoury. It must also be noted that De Facto relationships are legally recognised relationships in both Property and Family Law and De Facto Law allows a person to have as many De Facto Relationships (also same sex) as they want even if already married.

The Registration with Births Deaths And Marriages is the only difference between these and other relationships. Registration is allowed with only one partner creating an inequality withing the law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Floraway (talk • contribs) 08:34, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

No, and no. That clause is a common example of cross-border reciprocity, where everyone agrees to "give a pass" to everyone else's legalities (within reason). This avoids problems with how one jurisdiction is supposed to, within its borders, enforce the customs of others upon visitors, or awkwardnesses such as voiding a legal contract fully valid elsewhere simply because one or more signatories cross a particular border.

And it's intellectually dishonest to conflate polygamy with polyamory. Weeb Dingle (talk) 15:40, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

A LEGAL MARRIAGE IS NOT LEGAL

One sentence needs fixing, as it is aburd: "While a legal polygamous marriage is not legal . . . ." And what about the aborigines? (EnochBethany (talk) 06:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC))

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Polygamy in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216034940/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au:80/story/0,25197,23922968-5010800,00.html to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23922968-5010800,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216034940/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au:80/story/0,25197,23922968-5010800,00.html to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23922968-5010800,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

polyamory IS NOT polygamy

Hi, I'm here to correct a… misunderstanding.

Polygamy is a form of group marriage which is a form of polyfidelity which is a form of polyamory which is a form of non-monogamy. Therefore, to lump polyamory in Australia into supporting the concept of polygamy in Australia is highly misleading — beginning at polygamy is BY DEFINITION a tiny subgroup of polyamory.

Furthermore, my impression is that very few polygamous people, whether covert or overt, would welcome being called "polyamorous."

Overall, the entire section Polyamorous activists (presently section 2) is irrelevant here. At best, it borders on propaganda, attempting to mask bigamy with the political correctness of non-monogamous lifestyles. (For what it's worth, I have nothing against political correctness, much less non-mon practices.) Such propaganda is not uncommon; review the foregoing comments by former editor Floraway that put the confusion to argumentative advantage.

As that section makes up more than 50% of the article, I make the case that this article's existence is questionable at best. I will be paring back attempts to hide polygamy behind the metaphoric skirts of polyamory.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 07:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I've removed the mentions of Dan Savage. Though it's implied that Savage is somehow a supporter of polygamous marriage, the claim is not explicitly made, nor can I locate any such sentiments in his writing. The fact he has visited Australia and therefore has commented upon polygamy in Australia is a ludicrous non sequitur. This certainly indicates a propagandistic agenda harbored by the contributing "editor."
Weeb Dingle (talk) 08:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Traditional Indigenous culture

We should probably have some content on the role of polygamy in traditional Indigenous culture in some parts of Australia. Boneymau (talk) 23:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Have added, Prevalence - Indigenous communities B20097 (talk) 02:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)