Seven wrote:Truth Dancer's comments echo what I feel. That is the reason I do not care for the show. When you say this is what polygamy was meant to be like, what do you mean? There is not a man out there who can practice polygamy without making women his posessions. (consensual or not, it is degrading to women) When you read the journals of modern day women who lived it, they had brain washed themselves into believing it brought happiness. For a woman to find peace in polygamy she must submit herself to man and remove the natural feelings of love that man and wife should have. Sure, there are going to be those women who really don't desire any intimate realtionship and friendship with a man and for them polygamy wouldn't be a problem. What is a problem is that children are involved. They are setting a horrible example to their sons & daughters by embracing that system of marriage.
There is not a man who can have a marriage at all without making a woman his possession. But the axe swings both ways and they also are owned by her. Is that degrading? I hope not.
I've seen polygamy and polyamory work and the participants are happy. I don't see it as a monstrosity.
FUNDIE ALERT!!!
Shoot Neh, you are pretty close to the Eldorado YFZ compound, why not just move up there?
JAK wrote:Nehor stated: There is not a man who can have a marriage at all without making a woman his possession. But the axe swings both ways and they also are owned by her. Is that degrading? I hope not.
I've seen polygamy and polyamory work and the participants are happy. I don't see it as a monstrosity.
Just how wide is your survey for your all-inclusive declaration?
Your blithe, hasty generalization in no way refutes the analysis of Seven and truth dancer. They are correct in analysis, not you.
JAK
I'm not combating an analysis. I'm against their conclusion. I see nothing inherently wrong with either of those lifestyles. Some people do and others do not.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
There is not a man who can have a marriage at all without making a woman his possession. But the axe swings both ways and they also are owned by her. Is that degrading? I hope not.
Wow... I completely disagree with your idea marriage is about possession, or one spouse is the possession of the other. I find it a very odd way to describe a partnership.
I've seen polygamy and polyamory work and the participants are happy. I don't see it as a monstrosity.
As I have stated... there are folks who happily engage in all sorts of alternative relationships. Some folks like to be owned, treated as slaves, hurt, punished. Some folks like all sorts of things most of us find disgusting and cruel... so?
If folks want to engage in whatever weird/odd/icky/perverted/nasty/unusual or whatever partnering behavior, then fine... so long as children are not hurt and they engage in their behavior without coercion, manipulation, threat... and they are ADULTS!
~dancer~
I don't believe marriage is best defined by the people owning each other but I was trying to point out that if a polygamous or polyamorous marriage suggests that one spouse owns the other as was above suggested then why not a regular marriage? I don't see how your husband having another wife or your wife having another husband would make you more THEIRS then a more conventional marriage.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Shoot Neh, you are pretty close to the Eldorado YFZ compound, why not just move up there?
No thanks, happy where I am.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Some say that if Gay Marriage is ever legalized that Bigamy laws will fall as well. I think it will be more likely that bigamy laws will be challenged by Muslims and those laws will be found unconstitutional. Mormon Polygamists can not bring the type of pressure (worldwide) that the muslems can bring to bare on both state and Federal Governments. The Fed's bend over backwards to let Muslems have unfettered ability to practice their religion. School district in both California and New York have approved of constructing public funded Muslem only schools. No other religious group has more power to get the government to do their bidding. So, if Polygamy becomes legal it will be due to Muslem pressure... IMHO
Seek government funding. The people you help don't know where the money came from originally. They just know that you are helping them when the government didn't. Also as one Islamist said: if someone provides money for milk, that frees up money for weapons. For example there is often money available for education. If Islam just happens to be one of the primary topics being taught, it was without your knowledge. Quote: A publicly funded charter school in California is under investigation for teaching Islam to students, the San Francisco Chronicle has reported. ... A surprise inspection by the Chronicle indicated that Silicon Valley Academy was operating as a religious school. There were Korans in the principal’s office, along with a children’s version of the Muslim scriptures titled My Little Qu’ran. Students reported that they prayed in class with teachers and studied the tenets of Islam. Parents picking up children after school told the paper they believed the school was religious.
