Washington Post Promotes the 'Evolution' of 'Forsaking Monogamy'

Newsbusters ^ | May 27, 2015 | 7:12 EDT | Tim Graham

[donna]

My first thought was the headline should read:

'Forsaking Fatherhood'

[ifinnegan]

Yes.

Nor does she seem to realize there are a lot of other things that can be rationalized via an evolutionary biology lens. Things that may not be as benign as fooling around.

[Ronin]

The Leftist utopia demands destruction of any power outside the state. That includes, most specifically, families and religions. Families must be broken up, religions must be made harmless to Leftist interests. They are succeeding quite well.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[the OlLine Rebel]

Make no mistake guys.

Long before homos bubbled openly to the surface and made everyone celebrate them, immorality with sex was in full swing. It is we heteros who flouted morality openly and made society accept screwing around without marriage, etc. Homos simply latched onto that slipping morality.

Homos would be nowhere without hetero loosening of morality.

We really have no one to blame but ourselves.

[the OlLine Rebel]

I think they really meant wolves.

[SoFloFreeper]

DEvolution.

[jwalsh07]

Hey it worked great in Rome.

[jwalsh07]

Hey it worked great in Rome.

[rbg81]

To the Post, this is about empowering the ladies, not the men:

---

Really? This is the lie of the century. Monogamy is empowering to women, not men. Why? Simply because women are less sought after once they reach 30 (and for many, even before that). In contrast, many men are considered more attractive as they age, especially if they get wealthier. A wealthy middle aged man is much more attractive to the opposite sex (and still fertile) than a wealthy middle aged woman.

If the Libs had their way, only the homos would get married. And they are certainly not monogamous even after they are married.

[jimbug]

Well, the Living God has not evolved; He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, and was always the same in His eternal existence. And, His view of sodomy has not changed—it is and always will be an abomination.

[Zathras]

This is the next thing being floated.
Polyamorous.
There are reasons so many people are moving to Portland and Seattle.

[sphinx]

This line of “evolution” away from a time-honored definition of matrimony has been followed before. Somehow, it always presaged the collapse of a civilization and the demise of a once-powerful nation.

There is, in fact, a new factor today. The modern welfare state systematically subsidizes illegitimacy (and a host of other dysfunctional behaviors). But I agree with the rest of your observation.

[sauropod]

Precisely. God is not mocked.

The people in this story are trying to explain away sin.

[Not A Snowbird]

Polyamorous. There are reasons so many people are moving to Portland and Seattle.

Ew. No thank you.

[snoringbear]

“First, dogs do not mate for life. They mate all their lives, true, but anyone who has been around free ranging dogs knows very well that they most certainly do not mate for life.”

Heck, they’ll mate your leg if you will stand still for it :)

[GilesB]

Maybe so. Some people claim grey wolves are monogamous, but others say they will “cheat”.

I think it is probable that two alphas mate, and keep the others away from the most desirable (alpha) of the pack. Given opportunity, I reckon a wolf will be a dog.

[GilesB]

“Heck, they’ll mate your leg if you will stand still for it”

Yeah, but when you come back 3 years later, they are ready to mate your leg again....isn’t that devotion sweet?

[Jack Hammer]

Finally I can marry my horse....

[Tired of Taxes]

It is we heteros who flouted morality openly and made society accept screwing around without marriage, etc.

AMEN. You are 100% right.