I’ve changed my mind - I favor ‘marriage’ between any combination of living things.
We’ve destroyed the institution of marriage. We might as well end governmental recognition of marriage. Just let churches handle it.
Well; GOD did seem to mention it at one time; to one fella...
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
1 Timothy 3:2-3
2. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
3. not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
Polygamy has always existed. Homosexual marriage has never existed. And does not exist.
The argument for polygamy is much, much stronger than for homosexual “marriages”.
And the fact that there is an absolute and worsening shortage of boys who have been trained up to be husbands, while the desire to become a wife remains very strong, makes the sexual economics of the situation a re-inforcing principle.
Polygamy will be legalized within 24 months, if not sooner.
Why privilege sexual relationships, other than Sex being the god of our age?
Why should people whose primary attachment is not sexual be denied federal benefits? Everyone is entitled to (at least) one significant other.
I made this argument on FR. Our traditional “ethics basis” for marriage was Judeo-Christian, once you go with gay marriage you’ve basically dumped the “ethics basis” and no anything should go. This is what secularism can’t address. There are *reasons* Judeo-Christian ethics are beneficial to society, it is part of what enabled us to thrive.
For me, the Judeo-Christian basis for marriage has physical results, a major impact on society. We’ve completely lost the reasons “why” a one-man-one-woman marriage is beneficial to our survival, which is what it is really all about. When you consider the spread of disease, kids out of wedlock, (unintentional) inbreeding, etc. - the Judeo-Christian model has a massive effect on these societal ills. It is the ideal standard, more perfect than any other solution for these reasons, but we’ve forgotten. In our prosperous and technologically advanced society we can mitigate and absorb much of the consequences of poor moral choices but only so much. Now, because we’ve forgotten the “why”, we’ve thrown the baby out with the bathwater - anything goes.
From the Republican platform of 1856:
“Resolved: That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign powers over the Territories of the United States for their government; and that in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism—Polygamy, and Slavery. “
Polygamy is still a relic of barbarism.
Compared to a couple of male buttlickers spreading disease and vermin to young boys and others, marrying a couple of women is a very tame concern.
Indisputable logic.
I resent you people talking about men having more wives - Polygamy. What about we women who want more than one husband? You people are not politically correct - shame on you. /s :o)