The question is, why support marriage at all? If I want to cohabitate in the short or long term with two or three or four other persons of whatever gender, that is perfectly legal. It's only if I feel that I want or need the endorsement of the State or church that the concept of marriage even arises. But if I am asking an external authority to endorse my relationships, then surely that external authority has a perfect right to withhold endorsement for any reasons it deems fit. The Church has religious reasons for refusing to endorse anything but heterosexual monogamy and the State has electoral reasons. The solution is not to moan about why you can't have this or that sort of marriage, but to exclude the State or church altogether from one's personal life, and remove the remaining legal distinctions between people who are married and people who are not. "You are all individuals!" ('I'm not!' cries the would-be polygamist).

I have left Australia for a life in another country, and where I know family values are held supreme, and where people bread like rabbits. I live in a home with one loving wife some 30 years younger, and have kids all around me. My home is always full of music, singing, and laughter. I can’t have this in Australia.

At the various international airports I regularly pass through, I take the time to talk to fellow travelers who are doing much the same thing. This has fueled the idea that we should promote the same thing rather than let it happen virtually unnoticed. Men are leaving the country in hordes – the word is out. Who would want to live in a country where 5 men suicide every day because of family problems? This is more than the national road slaughter, and totally unrecognized by authorities.

A marketing campaign suggesting and encouraging all Australian men to “Leave” could well pressure otherwise gutless politicians to change the family climate in Australia. Not all women are lesbians, and most women would not like to see the countries men disappear one at a time to unknown destinations with further returning reports of happiness like mine. The internal feminist Pressure would surely assist to implode the fueling nucleolus which maintains the unacceptable family climate in Australia.

Bill Morris billmorrisbillmorris@yahoo.co

Ayub Maftoon,

Islamic "teaching" on polygamy is like -- If you are not confident of marrying 2 or 3 or 4 wives, then marry only one wife.

This is like making a two-way bet -- If you are confident then do it, otherwise don't do it.
It does not take a great thinker to make up such "teachings", does it ??

Until someone actually marries multiple wives, how can he proves he is capable of being equally fair to all the wives ??

Yet without a shame, you claimed -- "It should be noted that Koran is the only scripture that..."

well..., the only scripture that teaches such a rubbish... and yet its believers are proud of the stupid "teaching"

Listen... A godhead of great wisdom never provided such a stupid teaching. Muhammad made that up himself partly because he needed to marry multiple women to benefit himself foremost.

You wrote -- "As Muslims Mr Yusuf and myself are obliged to say the truth..."

What truth ??

Listen... Muhammad never met an angel from God. That was not a truth. That was only a lie, a deception that should have been nipped in its bud.

But instead, Muhammad's lies have been replicated through polygamous and non-polygamous believers alike, passed off as truth through generations.

You are yet another modern-day victim of Muhammad's deception. But you are doing exactly the same thing... telling people Muhammad's lies are truth...

Um. If, using logic as suggested in the article, does Ayub mean that in India where there are so many more males than females the females should be able to practice polygamy :)
Imagine a woman having more than 1 husband to provide an income for the family, just like a queen bee.
I do suspect though that the talk of polygamy is thought of as a male perogative.

Aka,
The Chinese are practical people and it would not be a surprize to find that polygandry is to be a consideration to overcome the gender imbalance caused by the one child policy.

As far as we,in Aus, are concerned, i can't see official polygamy ever being lawfull even though it is far more honest than having affairs but of course having sexual relationships and parenting children outside marriage will continue.

The big loser is spouse number one which means polygamy will only work, to any extent, in societies where the female is totally subservient to the male. Personally speaking, why anyone would want more than one wife at a time is unimaginable to me.

I think it is reasonable for the author to point out the historical and social reasons for the practice of polygamy, but in doing so it is obvious why it is not acceptable in our modern society.

We are not living in a situation where there are too many women, despite the authors claims, as other responses have alslo pointed out. It is true that in many western countries there are slightly more women than men, but this is mainly due to the gap in life expectancy and is therefore more pronounced in older generations.

Another glaring oversight is that the obligation to marry women who have lost their male partner is only necessary in a society where women have no ability for social and financial independence or self-sufficiency, and therefore to be without a man is to be in a very perilous situation indeed. As a woman, I am glad that I am in a situation today where I do not need to find a man and hope that he will always be around to support me- I can enter into a relationship because I genuinely care for someone and want to share my life with them.

It is true that many people struggle with monogamy, and it is possible that men find it harder than women, but I don't think this is an argument for polygamy without also being an argument for polyandry. I also don't see why you would believe that a man can genuinely love more than one woman without believing that a woman can love more than one man.