Posted on 05/04/2008 4:14:25 PM PDT by Flo Nightengale
Seem to me that the polygamists need to hire the ACLU and American Psychological association, and other pressure groups to ascertain that there is a “Polygamy Gene” and the polygamists are just “born that way”.
polygamy = how to pee in your own gene pool!
I spent a lot of time in the garage. Really, really.
Just thinking back on it makes me glad to be a bitter old man, living alone, that can't accidentally end the world by leaving a seat up, supposing I could find an open stall.
/johnny
“Scarcity of women leads to a situation in which men with advantages — money, skills, education — will marry, but men without such advantages — poor, unskilled, illiterate — will not ....”
This is a critical point, and it bears repeating often.
Women’s organizations tend to see women as the victim in polygamy (no surprise). A lot of men might also fantasize about multiple wives (without multiple M.I.L.s). The harsh reality is that polygamy would hurt most men. It would also destabilize society — which the article also does a good job of explaining.
Good post.
PING
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Here is the way I see it. Polygamy maybe? Same sex marriage never!
Polygamy is illegal.
Facts are likely that most extra wives have to be kept- one way or another. The children provide the monies from the taxpayer. The man skims some of it off the top for himself.
yes polygamy is illegal, but there has been at least one lawsuit filed after the gay marriage lawsuits started making the argument that it’s discriminitory to limit marriage to 1 man and 1 woman. Reason being, polygamists can claim that 2 person marriage is also discriminitory.
If courts will find a constitutional right to same sex marriage, they could also use the same reasoning and find a constitutional right to polygamy, or any other arrangement that people wish to live in.
Like it or not, previous generations made a policy judgement that polygamy should be illegal. Similarly, nobody in years past ever thought about same sex marriage happening. But the same legal arguments, that it is discrimination, apply to both same sex marriage and polygamy.
The only rationale/justification I can imagine for polygamy is biological primitive -- it allows a single male to keep a number of breeding females pregnant, so it increases the number of offspring, which is useful for growing the tribe.
However, it is clear that not all males can take advantage of this opportunity, the birth ratio being roughly 50/50. So the long term effect is that it causes young males to be killed or exiled from the tribe to reduce competition.
From a social (not biological) point of view, it's just stupid and destabilizing.
OTOH, balanced with an equal amount of polyandry (multiple husbands for a single woman), it could work out in an interesting way. Look at polyandry pragmatically -- the men can cooperatively trade off responsibilities: my week to work, your week to take out the garbage and mow the lawn, his week to paint the porch. No one man gets burned out.
[Joking! I'm joking!!!]
Families were meant to be one man, one woman.
What kind of craziness is next???
If they're lucky, that's the only downside. It's usually more sinister.
In most polygamous groups, "excess" young men are simply killed, or exiled from the group, to reduce competition.
Polygamy is hell on males, except for the select few.
Multiple Mother's in Law!!
Oh, for God’s sake! I am not for same sex marriage; nor am I for polygamy. God forbid! This is such nonsense. All I’m saying is that when the authorities invaded that ranch, they did so by crapping all over the Constitution.
> Multiple Mother's in Law!!
True, of course. Presumably worth it (else they wouldn't do it), but Gawd what a nightmare "bargain"!!
Oh wait, perfect solution: Only marry sisters! Mutiple wives, only one MIL.
As conservatives we should have asked this question when the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas. At that time the asnwer to your question was polygamy, and we we were only slightly in trouble.
Now unfortunately, the answer to your question is ployamory, bestiality, canibalism and necrophilia. Since adult consent can be obtained or implied in all of these cases, our enlightened liberal friends see nothing wrong with them.
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.