Posted on 04/09/2009 6:11:38 PM PDT by JLS
Polygamy? Damn, just one was enough.
What sort of lunatics would want more than one woman?
Oh. Never mind.
I’m all for it, the government has no business governing how free people living in a free society cohabitate.
Of course, poor treatment of women, ignorance, repression, and superstition are normal states of affairs, as well. Once you start untethering from the core values of Western civilization, you'll simply revert back to earlier forms of civilization. Worship of the Earth as a deity, living as pagans, etc, etc.
I'm not particularly religious, but I know how our ancestors lived without the civilizing force of religion to guide them. And I have to say, as an alternative to Western civilization, it's not all that great.
Oscar Wilde famously quipped that “Bigamy is the condition of having one spouse too many. Monogamy is the same.”
Some say polygamy is a nightmare that looks like a dream ... or is it the other way around?
The thought of the Gang Naggings alone is enough to paralyze with dread!
Sounds like my office at work
13:3 ratio and the Men are Not Winning
Although it seems to work better that way
for some reason...
Gotta be honest. I can justify polygamy to myself a lot more than I can gay marriage. At least the parts fit together properly.
The primary reason though that polygamy will gain no traction has nothing to do with morals or anything so remotely noble.
It's that no one has figured out how to legally divide the assets when the husband and one of the wives decide to divorce.
Just as true of
Polyandry
Plural Marriage
Incestuous Unions
Polygamy is dangerous to society. I don't see it happening.
“I don’t want to have sex with my dog, but do want to claim her as a dependent for tax purposes.”
...And may your dog have plenty of puppies!
I tend toward the free market myself. I would say it is the governments business to decide what kind of living arrangements it will sanction.
You might say the government should not favor any types of living arrangements, but it does.
Marraige has been reduced to a corporate contract between 2 parties already-what logical arguement can there be against adding more members to the corporation?
And incest-what logical reason can you now use to prohibit any 2 adults to enter into the marraige contract? Health reasons? You could make that same losing argument against gay marraige, given the toll gay sex takes on the male anatomy. Nice try though.
The only way I see to preserve the tradition of one man, one woman marraige is to remove the government and societal benefits that come with the contract. That returns it to the only place where it seems to be in any way (and not always) respected and admired-the church. The village may have to be destroyed to save it.
Just think about it.
It will be damn near impossible to secure valuable testimony in these cases when the co-defendants are all married to each other and subject to spousal immunity.
http://www.ejfi.org/Civilization/Civilization-4.htm
The Russian Effort To Abolish Marriage
Casey, Lawrence, and Romer make that inevitable.
Polygamy? Damn, just one was is enough.
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.