Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Enterprise
My initial thoughts are that men will be more likely to have multiple wives than the reverse.

Your comment spurred a thought.

Knowing how when women get together and their cycles all line up, what man in his right mind would want to try to handle seven women all with PMS at the very same time?

17 posted on 12/22/2013 8:13:02 PM PST by Slyfox (We want our PRE-EXISTING HEALTH INSURANCE back!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: Slyfox; NVDave
LOL FOX. Just one woman on PMS is enough to drive a guy nuts. Picture Al Bundy.

But, to be theoretical here, the concept of marriage being defined as one man and one woman has been destroyed by letting a man marry a man and a woman marry a woman. That being the case, will the left now argue that marriage can only be between two people? If marriage is no longer defined as being between one man and one woman, will it expand to mean multiple men can marry each other, multiple women can marry each other, multiple men can marry one woman or several women, or multiple women can marry one man or several men? What if you have 500 unemployed men and 500 unemployed women. Can they all marry each other and then apply for foods stamps and other forms of welfare? In my humble opinion, this is one sleeping dog the left should have let lie. But the god of the left is CHAOS, and their god is well pleased.

22 posted on 12/22/2013 11:28:18 PM PST by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson