The gist of the argument in all of those sources seems to be that polyamory has historically worked out poorly for women and low status men.

Ok? I don't see that as a particularly compelling argument against it in the here and now. Marriage in general has been a pretty pro male power structure in most places.

They also cite genetic concerns.

Ok? Is the purpose of traditional marriage some sort of low key genetic control program?

[quote=@SleepingSilence]

(Pedophiles and age of consent laws very wildly around the globe, let alone US. To explain my sarcasm.)
[/quote]

Im down with establishing 18 as an age of consent for marriage seeing I am talking about the legal rights derived from it.

[quote=@SleepingSilence]

Society kind of matters though. 

[/quote]

In an abstract sense sure. This same fear mongering went on with gay marriage and lo the sun still rises. 


[quote=@SleepingSilence]
Also on tradition marriages...the thing that best guarantees personal health and happiness and financial stability being in your term "a mental death trap" I disagree strongly...
[/quote]

Not advocating for traditional marriage to be abolished. To my knowledge no straight person has been forced into a gay marriage since the supreme court decisions, despite the right wing fear mongering.




I'm glad you'd like that...frankly the fact you added the caveat of being controversial...but your original quote actually doesn't exclude incest...I wonder if you've really thought about what you're advocating for here. 

[/quote]
My quote is questioing wether there is a moral ground for precluding incestuos relationships between consenting adults. Paricularly seeing there does not seem to be an analogous argument being made against people with heritable genetic disease.


[quote=@SleepingSilence]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/low-fertility-rate-may-predict-the-next-recession-2018-02-26

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/fertility-rates-keep-dropping-and-it-s-going-hit-economy-hard
[/quote]

The purpose of marriage is not to provide children. If so you wouldn't have a moral case for sterile people to be married or for homosexuals or for people who just flat out didn't want children.


[quote=@SleepingSilence]
You should be. It's not just because it's "icky". Society didn't want too many of the population fucking their relatives, because babies are born risking more horrible problems with health/birth defects. To spare sounding any more politically incorrect I won't get into all the other examples that don't exactly produce offspring. Something that has potential to end civilizations...
[/quote]

The argument that there is an increased risk of genetic problems applies equally well to a whole range of people with heritable genetic diseases so unless you want to fire up the eugenics program...