Decriminalization of the crime of bigamy

Crime of bigamy 

Crime of bigamy 

What ethic is this that still considers “bigamy” a crime, and not, “adultery”, which since Law No. 11.106 / 05, is no longer considered a crime? So can I betray my spouse, at ease, as long as nobody knows? But if I resolve to take on my “second spouse” in public, officializing my marriage through marriage, do I commit “crime of bigamy,” even if my spouse agrees?

I do not understand this, for to me what counts is the true intention of the people and not the appearances. This ethic distorted by the convention that marriage can only be one, is that it has awakened several crimes of passion. Would not it be time to review these hypocritical concepts and values? After all, having more than one spouse at the same time could not be considered a crime anywhere, since many (more evolved) people no longer care about the exclusiveness and sexual possessiveness that they consider to be an outdated and stingy value.

These exclusivist and selfish values ​​ignore the love reality of many people who, despite having more than one spouse, are forced to keep up appearances by hiding the “second spouse”, otherwise they will be locked into saddles as if they were real criminals. Often these “criminals” who make up more than one family are happier than many traditional families of faithful but unhappy people.

Is not it time to review these selfish and mediocre values ​​and decriminalize bigamy, just as it was done with adultery? In fact, these people who dare to love more than one spouse, and build more than one family, should be examples for society, in that they often sacrifice themselves to keep more than one home, despite the difficulties and prejudices they face.

In laws or contracts

In laws or contracts

In today’s world where selfishness and individualism reign, this should be an example of solidarity and altruism. In the present times any form of love is valid, as long as it is for the improvement of marital and family happiness. True love, of course, should have no limits in rules pre-established in laws or contracts.

In fact, just as it is now possible for the couple to stipulate an arrangement of property proper to their marriage through the prenuptial agreement, it should also be possible to stipulate the type of marriage they desire: whether monogamy or polygamy. Only when this is possible will we have achieved true social democracy in its broadest and most democratic sense, that is, without the exclusion of anyone, much less of the “lovers” who are often responsible for the total happiness of the so-called traditional families.

In this sense, law should accompany the evolution of society’s customs and play its proper role, that is, regulate, through laws, as many factual situations as possible, and especially those that have been forgotten by the legislator, as is the case of polygamy. Thus, polygamy should be rethought and regulated by our legislators, even if they do not agree with this practice, because it is not a problem of the right to establish moral norms but to identify and regulate rights. Finally, to the Law, it is only up to regulate and protect people and their rights equally and without prejudice. After all, everyone is equal before the law and deserves the same legal protection in their family relations whatever they may be.

I leave here a question for reflection: to what extent can the State legislate by restricting the formation of new family nuclei in the way they are formed today, without restricting the number or sex of its components, and without discriminating against other forms of family that may with the evolution of society? Can the State prevent people from living together in a family relationship and acquiring rights derived from this coexistence simply because they want to form a family different from the traditional one? I do not think, then, that the State can not interfere in the intimate and family life of people, especially in relation to fundamental questions such as the search for happiness through personal fulfillment within the family, which must be protected in a way that does not restrict the possibilities There are many that exist for the formation of new families other than the conventional ones in order to really protect the fundamental right of people to live in a free, democratic, ethical, harmonious, loving, responsible and happy way.