Posted on 07/27/2015 5:35:40 AM PDT by the_boy_who_got_lost
There is some scriptural support in the Bible for polygamy. There is no support for homosexuality.
Who are we to judge?
Give them all the benefits.
All I can say is that the guy is nuts. Double the chores Double the nagging. Halve the free time. Halve the available funds.
I notice the focus is on the man having two wives when really the focus should be on the bi-sexual woman having both a wife and husband.
That’s what this is all about. Group marriage. Why stop at three? How about two bi-sexual men marrying two bi-sexual woman? The supreme bozo court has successfully destroyed the very definition of marriage.
Poor kids.
It’s just me, the spouse, and the dog with no kids and that is enough. I can’t imagine that load and demand.
That didn’t take long. But he has to be nuts. Imagine getting bitched at in stereo!
Look at the bright, at least the two women can be there to ask each other about their feelings, instead of having to ask him.
Actually, polygamy almost always led to trouble in the Bible. It usually leads to the women being in control.
Today, you rarely encounter a situation where there is wealth involved. The women are usually on Welfare.
“All I can say is that the guy is nuts”
Don’t forget double the amount of raw clams or oysters!
Actually, they fight a lot. There is always jockeying for position. See 1 Sam 1. If there are more than two women, one woman is given the role of Head Wife to control the other wives.
In early Mormon days, the men went on their mission when they had the money to do so which generally meant after they had wives and kids. After reading about their family life, I bet they were glad to leave. The infighting was infamous.
and double the mothers-in-law
Historically polygamy has it’s foundations in a “family” where the single male/husband is utterly dominant (Alpha) while the females/wives are subservient, usually with the elder female/wife acting as the Beta. Or in some cases a co-Alpha.
IMHO the best political way to create opposition to polygamy is to emphasize the sexism, traditional gender roles and power differential in such relationships that reduce the younger/junior wives to slaves, sexual playthings and baby factories.
IOW turn the Lefts own language and rules against it.
Times change. /S
OH I forgot that one. My (late) mother in law was actually not all that bad. My wife OTO conforms to the classic PITA m-i-l.
But just think about women in general now. I don't think any woman would be a slave unless it's a cult. So maybe it has to be a cult for it to work.
And have you noticed all the media stories about racists that show them as just plain folks who pay taxes, lead normal lives, and are happy?
Me neither.
Like many things in scripture, polygamy was allowed....would have to go back and check references but I suspect it was because of a vast differential in the number of men and women due to wars and the fact that the culture developed in a way that a woman on her own had extreme challenges simply to survive. Thus at the same time that both the Old and New Testament make it clear that the one man, one woman relationship was the preferred and ideal, polygamy was allowed to solve a particular problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.