toldailytopic: Is polygamy wrong?

Nick M said:

Yeah, but was somebody hurt?

Click to expand...

In the case of adultery, probably. In the case of polygamy, sometimes. This is why adultery is rarely acceptable behaviour whereas polygamy is sometimes acceptable behaviour.

An obvious precondition for polygamy/polyandry being acceptable would be making sure that everybody involved was happy with the situation. If this is done, then I would say that reasonable precautions had been taken to ensure that it didn't emotionally hurt someone.

So long as polygamists aren't marrying child brides or women against their will, I'm not really all that concerned. What consenting adults do under the sheets isn't really mine or anyone else's business. Kind of like a threesome. Would I ever engage in the practice? Heavens, no. One wife was enough, thank you.

Granite said:

Eh, I don't see anything wrong with it. I see plenty crazy about it, potentially, but to each their own.

Click to expand...

We don't agree often, but this is what I meant by 'wrong on so many levels' as well (crazy). Nice to be on the same page with you for once

Mark 10:6-9

King James Version (KJV)

Jesus' own words.

6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Male and female, not females.

7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; Wife not wives.

8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. Twain means two.

9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They did it anyway.

Men used to put their wife away because they weren't following the laws and to protect the woman Moses commanded that a man write a bill of divorcement because of the hardness of their hearts, meaning they didn't care if they sinned and kept doing it regardless if God hated it or not.

This may have been posted already, I wouldn't know, I don't want to read this thread.

MrRadish said:

In the case of adultery, probably. In the case of polygamy, sometimes. This is why adultery is rarely acceptable behaviour whereas polygamy is sometimes acceptable behaviour.

An obvious precondition for polygamy/polyandry being acceptable would be making sure that everybody involved was happy with the situation. If this is done, then I would say that reasonable precautions had been taken to ensure that it didn't emotionally hurt someone.

Click to expand...

could you see a woman getting away with having three men...
if a woman sleeps with three men she has another cruel Name given to here..an if a Man sleep with three woman, his mates say your a ledgend?

Charity said:

could you see a woman getting away with having three men...
if a woman sleeps with three men she has another cruel Name given to here..an if a Man sleep with three woman, his mates say your a ledgend?

Click to expand...

As far as I'm concerned people can sleep with as many other people as they like and, provided it's all consensual, above-board and everybody's happy with it I'll neither think better nor worse of them for it.

bybee said:

That would be natural law as interpreted by the carnal man....

Click to expand...

that would be reason and logic with emotion on hold

chrysostom said:

that would be reason and logic with emotion on hold

Click to expand...

Is it logical for a misogynist to want more than one wife?

Sure, if it's just a means of controlling and degrading women.

Granite said:

Sure, if it's just a means of controlling and degrading women.

Click to expand...

True.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Ah yes, the basis for all atheist/agnostic belief: consent.

Rusha said:

Now now, ASC ... Christians have the capability of consenting also.

Click to expand...

Yes, but we are told to consent to things that are only moral in the eyes of God (having six wives, a same gender lover, sex with a dolphin, or procreating with your sister aren't).


Quote:
Rules, so many rules! But but but, why can't children or teens consent as well?

Because children are not capable of consent. Is there some reason in particular that you are arguing that they should be?

Click to expand...

I'm not the one that wrote the 1972 "gay agenda":

"Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent."
http://www.article8.org/docs/general/platform.htm

(Edit): I missed this one:

Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.

Nor am I the one saying that sex with little boys (or girls) is natural.
http://www.us2000.org/cfmc/Pedophilia.pdf

Quote:
In another thread a three year old told his two "mommies" that he wanted to be a girl (and they took his word for it and are going through with his request), so why can't teens or 12 year olds know what's best for them?

A THREE year old is having a sex change? That would be very much like a three year old being allowed to marry, have a limb removed or have a tattoo because his/her parent/parents allow it.

So what is your argument for believing a three year old should be allowed to have a sex change?

Click to expand...

If two lesbians (who adopted the boy at age 2) "want what's best for him" (in this case mutilating his body so that he can be like them), IT MUST BE GOOD.


Quote:
I see, when it comes to philosophy, atheist principles (consent) are great, but when it comes to your own personal life, Christian principles are better?

Pfftttt ... step away from the mirror and quit with the projections already. It is YOUR religion, not my *secular* beliefs that endorses polygamy.

"7: And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; 8: And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things" (2 Sam. 12).

Isaiah 4

1And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

Click to expand...

Yet ANOTHER atheist (oops, you're just "not sure if God exists", sorry) that picks through the Bible trying to find something to meet their agenda so that they can take it out of context for their own selfish needs.

Had you read the first chapter in the Bible you would know what God had/has intended for man and woman when it comes to sexuality and marriage.

Or, you could have payed attention to the very FIRST post in this thread:

"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh".

Let me know if I'm missing anything that is plural in that verse.

In scripture, marriage is often given as a type of relationship with GOD.

Christ has 1 bride.
Christ says He will never leave you alone.

A man who marries more than 1 will have to leave 1 while he is with the other.

aCultureWarrior said:

Yes, but we are told to consent to things that are only moral in the eyes of God (having six wives, a same gender lover, sex with a dolphin, or procreating with your sister aren't).

Click to expand...

If you throw out a large enough net aCW you might catch a unicorn too.

Since you don't seem to be able to explain away the many instances of multiple wives among your deity's "chosen people" or cite even one bible verse specifying anything immoral about the practice of having more than one spouse all you are doing is blowing smoke.

I'm not the one that wrote the 1972 "gay agenda":

"Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent."
http://www.article8.org/docs/general/platform.htm

(Edit): I missed this one:

Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.

Nor am I the one saying that sex with little boys (or girls) is natural.
http://www.us2000.org/cfmc/Pedophilia.pdf

Click to expand...

Red Herring(s) :yawn:

Quote:
In another thread a three year old told his two "mommies" that he wanted to be a girl (and they took his word for it and are going through with his request), so why can't teens or 12 year olds know what's best for them?

If two lesbians (who adopted the boy at age 2) "want what's best for him" (in this case mutilating his body so that he can be like them), IT MUST BE GOOD.

Click to expand...

Red RED Herring :yawn: :loser:

Quote:
I see, when it comes to philosophy, atheist principles (consent) are great, but when it comes to your own personal life, Christian principles are better?

Yet ANOTHER atheist (oops, you're just "not sure if God exists", sorry) that picks through the Bible trying to find something to meet their agenda so that they can take it out of context for their own selfish needs.

Click to expand...

Ahem . . . the quotes ARE NOT out of context.

(Your attempt to poison the well by ad hominem not withstanding.)

Had you read the first chapter in the Bible you would know what God had/has intended for man and woman when it comes to sexuality and marriage.

Or, you could have payed attention to the very FIRST post in this thread:

"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh".

Let me know if I'm missing anything that is plural in that verse.

Click to expand...

It is pretty pathetic of you to quote Nick as your source of inspiration considering this.

Jesus told a parable of one man who married multiple wives.

Matthew 25:1-10 1Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. 2And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. 3They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: 4But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. 5While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. 6And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. 7Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. 8And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. 9But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. 10And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.​

aCultureWarrior said:

Yes, but we are told to consent to things that are only moral in the eyes of God (having six wives, a same gender lover, sex with a dolphin, or procreating with your sister aren't).

Click to expand...

And no one is preventing you from applying your *religious* rules to YOURSELF.

I'm not the one that wrote the 1972 "gay agenda"

Click to expand...

This is the only thing left in your rant that is am willing to respond to ASC.

You seem to assume that because there are gays associated with an act or petition that it represent all gays and everyone who against homosexuality being outlawed.

That is as accurate as claiming every Christian is responsible for the burning of innocent women, that all prolifers advocate murdering abortion doctors and that all Christians are walking mini-me's of Fred Phelps.

I have always advocated that child molesters receive the death penalty, regardless of whether the person in question is heterosexual or homosexual.

What I am not willing to buy into is the STUPIDITY of claiming that every single gay person on the planet are child molesters.

Now ... outside of your religion, can you come up with even one reason why two DISEASE-FREE, CONSENTING ADULTS should be charged with a capital offense for having a sexual relationship?

genuineoriginal said:

Jesus told a parable of one man who married multiple wives.

Matthew 25:1-10 1Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. 2And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. 3They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: 4But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. 5While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. 6And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. 7Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. 8And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. 9But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. 10And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.​

Click to expand...

Please explain how you managed to get 10 brides to equal 10 virgins?

Silent Hunter said:

Please explain how you managed to get 10 brides to equal 10 virgins?

Click to expand...

Apparantly you don't know anything about first century Israeli marriage customs.

The ten virgins were bethrothed (engaged to be married) to the one bridegroom.

In the parable, five of the virgins married the bridegroom.

genuineoriginal said:

Apparently you don't know anything about first century Israeli marriage customs.

The ten virgins were bethrothed (engaged to be married) to the one bridegroom.

In the parable, five of the virgins married the bridegroom.

Click to expand...

You're making an assumption based on . . . well . . . nothing at all except perhaps your personal interpretation of (reading into) the verse.

Assertions made without evidence are dismissed without evidence.

Regardless, exactly where does Joshua say the act of marrying more than one woman is immoral (not that that was the point of your original post)?

Silent Hunter said:

Regardless, exactly where does Joshua say the act of marrying more than one woman is immoral (not that that was the point of your original post)?

Click to expand...

Can you show me what you are talking about?

I'm curious about the criteria for marriage. Should both bride and groom be virgins? Once a man has taken a wife he is no longer a virgin.
The case for widows and widowers would, of course, be different.