What do you you think? about 200 children rallied at the courthouse in defence of their parents and polygamy.

I think the worst part about polygamy is that it's illegal.

And thus law abiding citizens tend to stay away from it.

If one is already already a criminal and rejected from society at large, one might be inclined towards other criminal or wrongful acts.

So criminalizing it encourages abuses in polygamous relationships and popularizes the conception that polygamy is wrong, even though throughout mankind's history it has been the rule rather than the exception, even in the bible (especially in the bible) with little harm attributed to it until recently.

Polygamous marriages can provide much more stability both in the realm of spousal harmony (shared responsibilities) and in the realm of parenting where it provides a sturdy framework for a stable and healthy childhood -- several parental figures means more role models and more people to go to when one needs help and more chances for a child to seek help than to suffer.

And when it comes down to it, I don't think that the federal or state governments have any legitimate authority to regulate marriage. Marriage is a religious event and is therefore outside of the province of government under our Constitution.

Let the government regulate "civil unions" and leave marriage to the shamans.

I don't see a problem with adults living their lives as they see fit to, free to be married to who they want to be, and raising their children if they so choose to.

Time for government to GTF out of our bedrooms and living rooms.

---

Strength without compassion is brutality. Compassion without strength is weakness.

We must train our minds to desire what the situation demands.

If sodomy is tolerated (a practice that is shunned by most cultures) in the US why
not polygamy (which is practiced in a number of cultures/civilizations)? In the age
where the cost of living/taxes keeps rising, and salaries barely keep up one can
meet the financial needs by having many working wives who can take turns
watching the kids and bring in income.

It sure would be a lot easier if I could have a few more wives.

Quote
MacMagus
And when it comes down to it, I don't think that the federal or state governments have any legitimate authority to regulate marriage. Marriage is a religious event and is therefore outside of the province of government under our Constitution.

Let the government regulate "civil unions" and leave marriage to the shamans.

I agree with that distinction, though it would likely result in a polygamist family identifying "one" spouse when it came time to things like welfare benefits, social services and state-mandated inclusion for insurance and related "civil union" issues.

And Pelgrayso....

.... after 33 years with one, I have to disagree



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2006 03:55PM by Pops.

polygamy dictates one husband with many MANY wives. What about one wife with many husbands, there are tasks that could be accomplished with more husbands. As far a financial stability, life would be a whole lot easier financially when many husbands bring the checks home to one wife and many children. After all men still earn more than women on average

---

SoCal for now.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2006 07:14PM by kap.

> polygamy dictates one husband with many MANY wives.

Polygamy: Marriage to more than one spouse at the same time. An umbrella term encompassing both polyandry and polygyny.

It's not just one guy and a bunch of wives.

One of my favorites is the line-marriage.
[en.wikipedia.org]

guess the supporters failed to mention where some of the Utah/Arizona sects drive out the young males (16, 17, 18 year olds driven off the compounds and told not to come back) so the older men have less competition for the females.

---

Bryan
______________________________________________________
Mac Studio 2022
MacBook Pro 14 inch 2021
iPhone 14 Pro
Location: Cincinnati



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2006 09:26PM by Grumpyguy.

Quote
Grumpyguy
guess the supporters failed to mention where some of the Utah/Arizona sects drive out the young males (16, 17, 18 year olds driven off the compounds and told not to come back) so the older men have less competition for the females.

This says something about those particular communal sects, but says nothing about the concept of polygamy as a whole.

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

Quote
Grumpyguy
guess the supporters failed to mention where some of the Utah/Arizona sects drive out the young males (16, 17, 18 year olds driven off the compounds and told not to come back) so the older men have less competition for the females.

Hell, I tried to drive my sons out at those ages.

Though for different reasons.

As long as they're not burning cars and causing mayhem, I see no reason not to rally.

As long as it can work either way (1 man multiple wives, 1 woman multiple husbands) I think it could be legal. Although either configuration has zero appeal to me. And I bet there isn't a man alive who is going to go for the "1 woman multiple husbands" version. The entire set-up smells like piggies to me. But to each his own.

---

> And I bet there isn't a man alive who is going to go for the "1 woman multiple husbands" version.

I think you'd be surprised.

I know of two households right now where they're living like that. Same setup in each: One guy is a stay-at-home dad and the other guy and the woman work. It's hard to tell whether they're sharing *everything* like they're married, but everyone pretty much assumes it.

I've also seen such families profiled on tv. The shared household phenomenon is supposedly increasing in popularity due to divorce and rising costs of living. The combined income allows them to support a larger household with room for the kids to play instead of being stuck in a small apartment.

Are we talking married to all and each other here?

Because I personally have had plenty of living arrangements (platonic straight male roommate; gay male roommate; gay male roommate and his lover; my lover and a platonic gay male roommate; my lover and a platonic straight male roommate) but they were none of them polygamous marriages and I hope people didn't assume they were. LOL.

And it certainly convinced me that marrying more than one man would be a big mistake. I don't care if they are gay or straight, men are not into 50/50 split on household chores. That's a lot of picking up to do, after two men - any more would be a real pita.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2006 03:33PM by $tevie.

> Are we talking married to all and each other here?

As I said, it's unspoken, but assumed. And obviously, they're not marriages under the law or as recognized by the majority of Christians.


> I don't care if they are gay or straight, men are not into 50/50 split on household chores.

What generation are you from?

So many women are lazy slobs at home. They leave all the cooking and cleaning to guys. I hate all the cleaning up I have to do after my girlfriend's been hanging out for awhile. The only chores I get out of her are the occasional load of laundry and only if she's got stuff of her own to wash and I'm paying. I remember when the women I dated were so much less selfish. It's a frequent topic of conversation when I hang out with my buddies. We cheer when a guy brings home a girl who makes a contribution around the house.

I'm from the Pepsi Generation.

"Hey, baby, wanna marry me and my five other wives?"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2006 04:06PM by $tevie.