How can you love someone and force them to be monogamous?

as stated above by Trippin 2.0
" if it was something that you can forge between numerous people equally, then there's nothing special or intimate about it."....
yep. And i would add to that, why bother being in a relationship then? why have a Marriage or a Girlfriend? Why not just have a random assortment of bodies to entwine with?
Is it because ultimately one still wants to feel as though there is ONE special person for them?
Where does the line get drawn? So your wife finds a handsome young man that she starts bumping uglies with, and through that intimate physical act, she learns to care for him and he for her, and perhaps when you would like her home making dinner, she is at his house, in his bed, discussing his day with him, offering him emotional support while you sit at home in an empty house.... Then what? Do you make a call and go to a girl who takes on the role as 'satisfier'? And then wife comes home one day and you are not there for her... so she looks elsewhere... Like, what's the point?
If there is no emotional investment in sex, if there is no intimacy, and its just mechanical action, then who cares if you have the same person daily, or a blow up doll.
If it's because you like variety, then why bother having a Wife or Girlfriend?
I mean, i understand the desire to be with other people, but there are a variety of ramifications and i think that the opinions of others, as to why they are monogamous have been swept to the side by you as being absurd or wrong. Not cool.

There is a time and a place for feelings. I'm not immune to feelings, but you can't just let your feelings control you. A relationship with someone (especially one that is intended to last forever like marriage) is a serious decision. Why on Earth would you let your feelings enter into that decision? The only smart way to make decisions is using reason, not emotion.

Are you actually trying to say you think people should just have any old beliefs without any justification for those beliefs? You just randomly choose what to believe with no reason? I sure hope you don't vote!

You've clearly not understood anything I've said in this thread. I have not "slammed" anybody for anything. I absolutely respect other people's right to make choices, even choices I disagree with. I am the biggest advocate of freedom and human rights that you will ever come in contact with. I would just like to know why people make a certain choice because I honestly don't understand it. I have never once implied that I don't think people should be allowed to make the choice or "slammed" anyone for making the choice. You might want to re-read what I have actually written with a more objective eye.

That feeling of being backed up against the wall is common when faced with the fact that one's beliefs may not be tenable. I realize that it's an uncomfortable feeling. It is often even for me after years and years of training and experience in rational discussion. However, the appropriate thing to do in that situation is to re-examine your beliefs and be prepared to admit that you might be wrong. What too many people often do instead is take offense or even become violent on occasion. That's just not very productive.

I was completely honest from the very beginning of this thread. I did and still do seek to understand why people would make the choice to require sexual exclusivity from their partner. It doesn't make much sense when you say that I was looking for a debate "instead of understanding." What do you think the point of a debate is? A debate is an attempt to find understanding. In fact, a debate is pretty much the only reasonable way to seek understanding. If I were not to debate the answers given, then I could certainly not claim to truly be seeking understanding.

Surely you don't just believe everything you are told, right? When faced with potential "information," you should always question it to see if it is justified. If you don't you will end up believing a lot of strange and very untrue things.

You seem to actually have the beginnings of an argument here. I will attempt to put it into a more structured form with numbered premises to try to understand it better.

To make the sentences shorter and therefore simpler to understand, I will use the following variables:

X: a person
Y: X's partner in a relationship
Z: emotions, intimacy, bonding, trust, and being invested in one's partner

Here is what I think you are saying:
1. X requires relationships in which both X and Y have Z.
2. X requires relationships that are special for both X and Y. (implicit premise)
3. If Z exists in more than one of a person's relationships, there would be nothing special about any of that person's relationships.
4. X has no desire to have sex with someone without Z
5. X will be hurt if X's relationship does not meet X's requirements (implicit premise)
Therefore, if Y had sex with someone besides X, X would be hurt.

OK, let me study this for a second.

We can conclude from 1, 2, and 3 that X wants a single relationship and from the addition of 4 that X's partner in the relationship would be the only person X wants to have sex with.

This proves quite well that X would be sexually exclusive within the relationship. However, that's not the stated conclusion. The stated conclusion is that Y not being sexually exclusive would hurt X.

When we consider premise 5, we can come up with the following:
We can conclude that if X or Y did not have Z that X would be hurt.
We can also conclude that if X or Y had Z in multiple relationships, it would hurt X.
This argument does support its stated conclusion, however, because the only thing we know about anyone's preferences regarding sex is about X. We know nothing about Y in that regard, so the conclusion doesn't hold water.

Now, to be fair, we could easily fix this argument by simply adding another premise that states "Y has no desire to have sex with someone without Z." However, I can't think of any good reason to add that premise. Why must that be true of Y? It sounds to me as though X is simply transferring her own feelings onto Y and feeling hurt unnecessarily.

By the way, I also think the truth of premise 3 is pretty questionable.

unless you think that a relationship is only sex or that sex implies a relationship, nothing you have said here makes any sense.

because relationships are not just sex.

How is it not possible to feel that and still have sex with others unless a relationship is only sex?

Then I would end the relationship with her. The same basic rules apply. If she doesn't have time for me, I end the relationship. It has nothing to do with the sex in your scenario. It has to do with her clearly not taking my relationship with her seriously.

and who cares if you don't?

clearly not even remotely in the same category as sex with a human being

Wives and girlfriends are only for sex? Really?

I don't agree that I have swept anything to the side. I have made an honest effort to respond to everything raised in this thread. If I didn't respond to something it is because I either missed it or felt that I addressed it previously.

There's an article in the nytimes.com about how monogamy may have evolved.

That would be interesting to read. Do you have a link?

I haven't made my way though the entirety of the topic yet (I'm working on it), but there's something I wanted to contribute before offering anything about anything.

Treason, a debate over such a thing I think is a fine idea, but your assertion about opinions is absolutely incorrect. An opinion is typically held due to the values held by the person with the opinion. Looking at the base of the opinion, the value itself, it is impossible to empirically prove or disprove the value, or claim the supremacy of one over the other with a factual basis, as 1) such a thing can only be examined in relation to other values, which excludes in large part any tangible evidence (in this case, the only evidence that could be provided would be a comparison between testimonials from monogamous and couples like your propose, but that speaks more to an examination of monogamy than a value) and 2) the argument necessarily introduces bias from both sides in regard to each side's arguments. As such, one's view on the worth of monogamy being based on values, something which cannot be examined in a rational, scientific manner, leaves the matter of supporting an opinion such as this impossible to support, thus leaving the only validation the opinion has lying in the values of the individual, something which is impossible to empirically validate. Thus, I argue entitlement to one's opinion is a valid notion in this matter.

I would, perhaps, agree if the opinion was on something tangible, such as, say, whether product A or product B is better at doing job C, as that can be supported with evidence. Just a caveat.

My point in this matter is that if you're looking at the underlying reasons that prompt monogamy or not, you're looking for evidence that does not exist, that cannot exist. If you're looking purely at monogamy vs alternatives without any consideration as to why the belief is held (which would invalidate, according to your topic title, your point in bringing this up), then you'd be more reasonable in expecting evidence.

Now, I'll get back to reading the topic...saw the "opinions" line and had to weigh in.

Harley

Dude it's a lot more clicks for me to link it than it is for you to google it. It was this week. I thought you'd be interested, that's all.

Obv you don't get my points. Obv we aren't tuned in to the same channel and can't hear each other correctly, so not sure if i even want to bother but this one point at least i will respond to ----
My point is, both people out having sex with others is either
1) bound to lead to trouble because intimacy often naturally comes with sexual activity. That intimacy involves caring, concern etc. The guy makes your woman feel awesome and she ends up spending more time with him and this makes you dump her
or
2)there is no intimacy, it's only about sex so no worries about her developing feelings for this other guy, but then its sex without feeling and according to you, theres more to it than sex.

You argue for and against both. SAying, "no there's more to sex than just sex", yet at the same time, if feelings develop (often called a form of a relationship) then you would end it.

Comes down to WHAT are you wanting outside of the marriage/relationship? Why is one woman's body not enough for you (though i realize now that you are the guy who's g/f hasnt had sex with him in 15 months or longer) if its not just the BODY of another woman you want, then its the interaction too.. right? hanging out? spending time? sharing thoughts?

What is YOUR reason for wanting to be with women outside of the relationship you are in?
What is monogamy? and if monogamy is not for you, what is the word you use to describe the opposite? Polygamy?... and THATS not just about sex that is often about caring too.. and once again, caring leads to people spending time with that other person. You might not be #1 if youre busy out with someone else and she happens to also be with someone else. and to say that if she liked another guy and sometimes wasnt home when you wanted her there, that youu'd end it with her THATS about you wanting to be in control of her polygamous relations and THAT is not true polygamy.. its about You wanting to be with whoever you want, when you want it.
Wow man, you're just like.. really frustrating to deal with.

This thread appears to have run its course. I am now going to close it.