[Age of Reason]

That leaves 35% of the men with no prospect of ever marrying and having families.

So?

If they ain't man enough to earn a wife in the free market, we must have woman redistribution?

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Distribution" of women? No. What we need is Monogamy.

All the societies which are polygamous are also retrograde and virulently patriarchal. Under polygamy, the market--- to which you refer so confidently ---- is indeed a market that renders women semi-chattel if not outright slaves. Market forces distribute young women---like property--- to the older men that have the most money. This is not satisfactory to women, but in polygamous societies women have negligible social power.

This has a predictable, disastrous effect on both the equality of the sexes and the intimacy of the sexes. One-to-one correspondence works for both equality and intimacy. One-to-three-or-four doesn't.

I know that there are some people to whom everything (marriage, sex, childbearing, whatever) comes down to a question of market, property, ownership. This is a serious error. It brings us back to a mindset on human dignity typical of the Bronze Age; typical also of Shari'a law.

The American people must have the power, and the opportunity, to say No to polygamy. We want our ethic of human dignity, not market forces; we want such social changes as we choose to come by legislatures, not by judges; we want Western Civilization and Constitution, not some retrograde Mormon-Muslim model and Shari'a.

[LexBaird]

If they ain't man enough to earn a wife in the free market, we must have woman redistribution?

So, in your Age of Reason, women are commodities? How long before the 35% of Mateless just shoot the top 5% and take the women? Looking at China, we may find out within a generation.