Polygamy debate

amynicole21 wrote: I can't imagine this will get heated... but please play nice anyway.

I've never understood why polygamy is against the law. If someone wants to have 2, 3, 4x the misery of a regular marriage, who are we to judge?

gr33n3y3z replied:
I agree with you on this

I like watching Big Love I get a kick out of it actually
You have your older wife then younger wife and then the youngest wife

mckayleesmom replied:
I could care less if someone chose to have 50 wives....as long as they could afford them, they were educated and of legal age.

mckayleesmom replied:
God...I love that show and that is what made me realize...WHO CARES...as long as they know what they are getting into, are old enough to make the decision and the man can afford them.

mckayleesmom replied: Also...when I say educated....I mean aware that they have a choice. Alot of these woman are sheltered and don't know any different.

TheOaf66 replied: well for me it is a spiritual thing, God wants one man and woman to be married period. All of the other reasonings are fine but that is what it boils down to for me. This is also why if heaven forbid Jennie would go before me, no way would I remarry (why go through it twice)

Kaitlin'smom replied: I agree if thats what ADULTS choose who are we to judge them. I loved the Allie McBeal episode where Heather Lockler has 2 husbands. Made sence to me she needed one for this and one for that, just different aspects of her life, and they all knew. I only have a problem if they all dont know and dont agree, then its just lies and secrets.

coasterqueen replied: I don't see it to be a problem either because at least they are married, not cheating on anyone, kwim? Everyone is in agreement.

Heck it could be the best of all worlds or it could be the misery you mentioned.

Boo&BugsMom replied: I can't imagine any good coming out of it. Seriously, we are too human to not show our emotions when it comes to things like that...jealousy, hurt, etc. It has nothing to do with love, only lust.

Good explanation honey!

Added: God says one man and one woman...I don't argue with God because in my opinion, he always knows what is best for us.

TheOaf66 replied:
thanks

mom2my2cuties replied:
I have the same issue with it. However, I do realize religions differ so strongly on thier views of marriage and family and so do cultures. To each thier own I say.

coasterqueen replied:
You know I can see why she would too. Why not? Course I'm sure my husband could say the same thing about having 2 wives. One to cook, one to clean...oh I can see him saying he needs many wives. I know what our topic of conversation will be tonight.

Kaitlin'smom replied:
so you can only love one person?

is that a correct assumption by your statement?

Kaitlin'smom replied:
yes and I could see having 2 husbands....espically when the honey do list is LONG

Boo&BugsMom replied:
No...when you are married to multiple people at the same time I hardly doubt it's out of love. Has anyone seen an example of it based on polygamy? I doubt it.

mom2my2cuties replied:
Your post brought up something that might be the root of this being illegal -

When a domestic partner is murdered or injured by the other party - it is generally linked to feelings of jealousy, betrayal, hurt of some kind etc....

mckayleesmom replied:
That is what I love about the show BIG LOVE. Whenever you see interviews with real polygamists they claim that their is never and jealousy or cattiness and I find that hard to believe. I like Big Love because the show does deal with Jealousy, each woman as indiduals, their needs, desires, parenting styles and totally different personalities. But with all the problems is the friendship they have together and ways they work things out and make it work.....

Kirstenmumof3 replied: Okay responded to the wrong post! I don't have a problem with people having more than one marriage. As long as everyone as happy and they can afford it, I say hey why not!

mckayleesmom replied:
Ya, but the NORMAL person deals with those feelings differently. IMO there is something mentally wrong there to start out with. Normal people don't turn jealousy and hurt into murder. Most people pick up the pieces and move on or work out the problem.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
But it can add fuel to the fire and make people snap. Why play with fire?

coasterqueen replied:
Might be true but since we don't really know it could truly be love that they've married two people for . Just the other side of the coin since we can't really say it IS one or the other.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
I understand Karen, I just don't agree.

Kaitlin'smom replied:
just to clarify NO you cant love more than one person?

mckayleesmom replied:
Exactly...how many people here have been in love more then 1 time?....Heck..I have had feelings for more then 1 person at the same time...and I cared about them both....And it had nothing to do with Lust for me.

mom2my2cuties replied:

Normal people also don't think having multiple spouses is a "good idea" and normal people generally want normal families.

Edited to Add - I didn't mean that like it sounded, I just see absolutely nothing good or normal coming out having multiple spouses...

mckayleesmom replied:
But who is to say what is NORMAL.....They might think that we are not normal and obviously vise versa...Either way, the average person does not kill someone when they are jealous....There is usually something already mentally wrong with that person....a polygamist or not.

ETA...Im just saying that polygamy should have nothing to do with then murdering their wives.....Personally I haven't yet heard of a polygamist murdering their wife yet. Most of these woman don't know any better or chose to be in this type of lifestyle...so they learn to deal with the jealousy and work around it.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
In polygamy, NO.

How are my words getting twisted? I think I explained it pretty blunty to be honest. Just to clarify, we are talking about polygamy, not being in love with someone, breaking up, then falling in love again, or being married, divorced, then remarried.

redchief replied: I love more than one person. I love a great many people. I've chosen, and God has decreed, that I choose one to make my eternal partner. That is my stance on it.

Now I pose a series of related questions in an effort to reconcile myself with the general feeling of acceptance here.

Why is it that more than 99% of known polygamist relationships involve a single male and multiple females?

Does this fact not contribute to the degradation of women as individuals?

Don't these facts prove the hypothesis that polygamy is more about masculine power over females than about love?

coasterqueen replied:
I don't think they are. I am curious why you can't love another person as a polygamist, though? What is your justification for that? I'm really being curious when I ask. I don't see why a polygamist couldn't love more than one person.

coasterqueen replied:
Maybe it is about power and not love. Good points. But is it also that we only hear about males, and not the females? Just wondering.

mckayleesmom replied:
We had this debate on another board a while back and I learned that in different cultures it is actually the other way around.....There is a name for it....But there is 1 wife and many men......

Just thought I would throw that out there..cause I thought it was interesting after Eds post.

redchief replied:
There is no doubt the entire topic is culturally impacted, so I clarify that I am talking OUR culture, in this day and time.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
Karen, because I believe God's words to be true and right, and God does not support polygamy, period. I dont argue with God's word. Anyone can disagree with me and not believe in God's word and that is fine, but it seems whenever I base my opinion on God, some people need to blast it out of the water. I have every right to base my opinion on God as does anyone else. I'm not questioning anyone else's opinion as to why they believe it is ok, so I don't think it's fair for others to analyze by opinion. Know what I mean?

amynicole21 replied: I can totally accept people being morally opposed to the idea - I for one wouldn't choose that life for my family. But how does that translate to the government to be allowed to legislatively tell us what can go on in our own families between consenting adults?

I think the idea of "one man for one woman" is a very nice concept, but is it something that needs to be legislated?

I don't like people dictating my "morals" I guess...

Kaitlin'smom replied:
sorry not trying to twist words just tring to understand and I do now. thanks! from what I gather you dont think it possible to love more than one spouse at a time, I disagree.

kit_kats_mom replied: To each his or her own. Frankly, I love my husband but would I take a fella that was a really great handyman in addition to my DH? Heck Yeah! Would I like to have another woman around to help in the kitchen and share child rearing and household duties with...as long as I was the alpha female? Bring it on.

I don't see why it's illegal either Amy, and the whole spiritual thing shouldn't be arugued. Most of the polygamists practice religion and THEIR God says it's ok. KWIM? I'm guessing that sex is probably not as big of a deal as we may think. Sure, there are probably some who are just having oragies but I would assume that since most are so religious that they are doing the deed for procreation mainly.

I do have a problem with the whole sheltering of kids thing (brought up and discussed ad nauseum int he dugger thread) and the underage wives thing though.

C&K*s Mommie replied: My brain is halfway here and on studying so, I will answer in short to your questions posed Ed. Yes, I fully agree, although I never thought of it that way for the latter question. The answer to the former question lies within the truth of the latter question.

I also fully agree with the four who have said it was God who ordained me to take on one husband, and my husband to take on one wife. (our past is a different story , but as for marriage this is the way it should be IMO)

luvmykids replied: My problem with polygamy is that IMO marriage should be a committment to ONE person. I don't know that it should be illegal, just that I strongly disagree with it based on my own beliefs about what marriage is meant to be. What's so special about that committment if it's shared with 3 or 8 other people as well?

I like Big Love too but don't necessarily think it's all that realistic, of course the wives are all great friends, it's TV!

coasterqueen replied:
I'm sorry. I didn't realize you were basing it on God. I read wrong. I sincerely wondered why you believed that, that's all. I have no problem with you basing your belief on God. Just wondered why you believed what you did and you explained, thank you. I'm sorry that I analyzed your opinion.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
It's ok. I just always seem to have to defend myself when God is brought up, that is all, so it tends to get my panties in a bunch. We're cool.

coasterqueen replied:
OMG, soda just hit the screen! You are hilarious.

And i think you are right, I think we think more about sex when we think of a polygamist and it's not all about that.

redchief replied:
Okay, I think I can answer this. The government (at least ours, in it's convoluted and sometimes totally insane way) exists to do the collective will of the people. Legislators are focused on passing laws that concentrate on the benefit of two sets of people. The first is to protect the majority from injury or harm from another. The second is to protect the rights of minorities who are unable to foster the political clout to be included in the first group. It is sometimes unfortunate that the second group makes progress at the expense and allowance of the first group. The first group is a moral collective, and, collectively, polygamy is not morally acceptable in our culture and society.

Edited to change "sufferance" to "expense and allowance". Sufferance was not the right word.

kit_kats_mom replied:
to answer. I would suppose that it's biologically driven. Women typically have less of a drive and men more of one. I could see it being a win win for all parties. A wife gets a few nights a week "off" and the DH gets all he wants.

I don't really think it would be degrading. It's really no different than a commune (with benefits). People live together and each has his or her own skills and their personal society goes on.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
If it's like any other show, I'm sure there are some creative editors.

mckayleesmom replied:
Thats what I was saying....Im sure its not all happy times..... , They do show the jealousy, and cattiness....among other things, But they chose this life...so they work around that...

1lilpeanut2love replied:
!

luvmykids replied:
I pretty much agree with you, Ed. I think it's a little sexist that one man has multiple women at his beck and call and the women meekly accept it. It IS their choice but JMO a woman who chooses to be one of many doesn't have much self-esteem. I'm sure there are exceptions but generally speaking, who here would honestly be ok with their husband having an emotional and/or physical relationship with another woman, then coming back to you? And how would you feel knowing that he doesn't get all he "needs" from your relationship and needing another to fill the gaps?

As far as loving more than one person, leaving religion out of the equation, I just don't believe that if you truly love someone you have room to love another that same way and equally. Speaking only for myself, when I'm in love there just isn't room for another in my heart. In my head maybe, but not in my heart.

Still, morals really can't be legislated, as much as the law says they can be it doesn't change how people think or feel, just how they conduct themselves to a degree. I still feel as strongly as opposed as I am that it's not necessarily a legislative issue.

redchief replied:
Of course it wouldn't have to be degrading, but historical references deride this. It is almost impossible to find a true and accurate record of a polygamist relationship where at least one of the women were not in some way degraded. This can be as simple as, as the show depicts, the "younger" wives being subservient to the elder.

I have another argument against polygamy that is scientifically; not morally based. I'll share that when the current argument has been aired thoroughly.

gr33n3y3z replied: Its not for me either

but also its not up to me to judge others who do it

mom2my2cuties replied: Since the Original poster asked something about the legality of this - Here is what I found so far.

In most countries, bigamy is illegal. However, in some countries - including America and Canada - the practice of polygamy is tolerated largely because

it is done as a religious practice (and thus involves issues of religious freedom), and
the people involved do not actually marry before the law. Rather, a man will legally marry one woman, and ‘marry’ additional wives in what they consider to be a ’spiritual’ sense
Members of the polygamous Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) - theologically, a cult of Mormonism (which itself is, theologically, a cult of Christianity) - use the latter approach to then obtain social security benefits, in a practice they refer to as “bleeding the beast.”

[T]he American taxpayer pays for much of this lifestyle. Recent records show in one year residents here collected more than $8-million from social services — including food stamps, welfare, health care — but the entire town paid less than $100,000 in income taxes.

“They are told to go on welfare,” Jessop said. “It’s called, “bleeding the beast.” They find it amusing that Satan is supporting God’s work.”

- Source: One Woman’s Crusade, ABC News, Mar. 4, 2004

This is one reason the practice is now under scrutiny in America - particularly in Colorado and Utah, states with significant polygamist communities.

Other reasons why polygamy has come under fire:

Some polygamists ‘marry’ underage girls, often (though not always) against their will

In some religious polygamist sects, women are treated as property, and are subject to arranged marriages

While their polygamous lifestyle was long tolerated, in recent years the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), has come under scrutiny.

In January, 2004, FLDS leader Warren Jeffs excommunicated a number of men. In the process, these men not only lost their homes, but their wives and children who - as is customary in this religious cult - were re-assigned to other men.

The resulting media coverage put long-tolerated issues with the sect on the front burner. See, for example, Prosecuting Polygamy - a series of reports by the Arizona Republic.

My2Beauties replied: If someone else wants to do it fine, but it's not for me. I would never and I mean never want to share my husband with another woman and I know he would feel the same way. I could never love two men as much as I love my husband at the same time, I just can't see it happening. I don't believe in cheating and to me polygamy is just glorified cheating and it's for those who can't "keep it in the pants!" The mere thought of my hubby with another woman physically makes me sick, seriously. I would barf if I ever found out he had slept with another woman, not to mention I am very jealous and I can see how it could honestly cause some hurt feelings and some huge fights (if someone gets into it and falls in love more than they thought or gets into it and realizes they dont' like the idea, one may go off). I am basing these feelings on my feelings, not only would I barf if I caught DH with another woman I would probably seriously injure her and him both

redchief replied: Point of order - As of 1948 the practice of polygamy (or bigamy) in the United States is illegal.

My2Beauties replied:
OK is this the same society that was on Dr Phil the other day. I was home sick and Dr Phil was on and it was about cults that have multiple partners and they make scheduled sex dates for their children as young as the age of 5. They used to be called "The Children of God" or something like that and now they call themselves "The Family?" They are in Arizona and Utah. Did anyone see this show?

My2Beauties replied:
I'm quoting myself I was reading my post and realized how psycho my last sentence sounded, when I say hurt her and him I don't mean as in kill or maim or anything awful like that I meant as in - just probably throwing some punches - so don't anyone think I would go psycho and kill anybody!

coasterqueen replied: I might be dense here, but do we know for sure that polygamy means having sex with more than one person? I mean I'm sure there are a lot of them that do but there might actually be some that don't? The wives might be for other reasons other than sex.

I'll have to ask my grandmother. She goes to a mormon church, although she is only married to one man and always has been. The only thing I remember going to the mormon church with her is if you act out of line anyone in that church can take you out of the church and discipline you. I got my butt spanked once by another member and my mom never let me go back again.

mom2my2cuties replied:
I am with you on this one...Not on the barfing thing - but there was an incident in New Orleans a few years ago that reminds me occasionally that I am not the "sharing" type.


We were walking around and checking out the touristy stuff while waiting on our 2 hour wait for dinner (stupid lines at Nola) Well, anyway, this "lady" (and I use that term lightly) comes up, grabs my husband's butt and asks ME if she can take him back to her hotel room. While my husband was standing there with this dumbfounded look on his face because he isn't sure what is going on, I tear into the woman and all of a sudden he realizes "Holy crap! something is up" I have already started attacking the woman.

Yeap - I am definately not the sharing type.


Oh! And here is another interesting article I found - http://www.absalom.com/mormon/contrib/wome...t-polygamy.html

mom2my2cuties replied:
Here are the definations of the different lifestyles -

Polygamy, Polyandry, Polygyny: What's the difference?

Polygyny is one man married to several women.

Polyandry is one woman married to several men.

Polygamy refers to either arrangement. T

The Utah Mormon church practiced polygyny. Several of today's Mormon faiths practice both polygyny and polyandry, which is consistent with the practices of Joseph Smith the faith's founder.

Plural marriage is a a synonym for any of the above and is often used as a euphanism in place of polygamy.

Cece00 replied: I personally do not understand polygamy, nor would I ever want a part in it. I do not understand why anyone would want a part in it.

I also agree that- IMO!- polygamy is just glorified cheating.

I'm not religious, but I think it cheapens TRADITIONAL marriage to change the tradition of "one man & one woman". I feel like what I have with my husband is VERY special and all of this polygamy, etc, cheapens the specialness of what I have with my husband.

The thought of having extra women around my house to help raise my children & clean & stuff isnt appealing to me. The thought of extra men around to do manly things isnt either. The thought of DH or myself having sex with other people is VERY unappealing to me.

And I think if the govt changes marriage to include other things (for example, polygamy), it would really open a door that shouldnt be opened...next thing you know, there'd be some crazy dude wanting to marry a goat

BUT- this is all just how *I* personally feel. Oh, and my husband feels this way, too.

kimberley replied:
i whole heartedly agree with this. MHO, it takes away what is special and intimate about a marriage as i know it by adding other people into the mix.

i am not well schooled on polygamist societies, but the blurbs i have read here and there are not appealing. the women are opressed and the men rule all. that is NOT real love as i understand it.

redchief replied: Point of order: Joseph Smith, the mormon prophet, retracted support for plural marriage in 1890, 12 years after initially stating, "I understand the law of celestial marriage to mean that every man in this Church, who has the ability to obey and practice it in righteousness and will not, shall be damned, I say I understand it to mean this and nothing less . . ."

Most believed he was under pressure from the Utah legislature when he denounced plural marriage, but in fact, he did.

amynicole21 replied:
Playing devil's advocate - If I had to guess, I would say that a polygamyst would say you DON'T love your partners exactly the same way - but you can love them equally. Just like with multiple children.

I think I'm the opposite of most people in that I would welcome someone taking over certain wifely duties for me PLEASE!!!

coasterqueen replied:
Yeah, I know the definitions but it doesn't state that means they are having sex with more than one? Sure that's usually standard in marriage, but not always.

mom2my2cuties replied: Sorry I am not exactly sure why I quoted you. There was actually a lot more to my post but I have a squirmy 2 year old in my lap and I must have just thought I posted. I know it had something to do with the question you asked, but since closing all my windows, I have no idea what it was

mysweetpeasWil&Wes replied: To answer the original question...I'm fine with it really. I would never go there myself, but I'm not one to judge what others want to do when it comes to who they love or live with or marry. I do think it must be difficult for the children though.

coasterqueen replied:
Oh no biggie. You gave me the other name for polygamy though. I knew there was another term for women marrying more than one man, but couldn't think of it til you posted it.

amandadakota replied: If that is what a person wants to do...more power to them... but hell.. I have enough trouble handling 1.... let a long 2,3, or 4..lol

redchief replied:
You "handle" your husband?

My DW simply tolerates me.

mom2my2cuties replied: Something I read that was interesting - Most people equate being Mormon with polygamy and it is actually discouraged in the church - according to one article, only about 3% of the mormons in a given church are actual polygamists.

mom2my2cuties replied:
See I think my husband would go insane...He has a hard enough time dealing with ONE woman - Can you imagine 2,3, or 4 - I mean what if they were all PMSing on different weeks....Holy cow - talk about absolutely NO peace!

redchief replied:
A wife + 2 daughters doesn't count? Sometimes the hormone levels in this house are insane, indeed.

coasterqueen replied:
Well that would certainly hold true around here. My grandmother didn't go to a mormon church til she was much older. Do you think it's more the case in Utah and such? I mean, that they tie polygamy and Mormons together?

mom2my2cuties replied: My dad used to say the same thing

coasterqueen replied:
I was going to say that. My DH is NOT looking forward to that day.

mom2my2cuties replied:
From the one i was just reading, Utah & Colorado.

luvmykids replied:
You're probably right, but for me that is not the love that is meant between husband and wife, again, just speaking for myself. It's meant to be a love above all others, for those two only, not shared or compromised by adding other people to the mix.

Of cours polygamists will have their reasons it works for them, otherwise they wouldn't do it.

redchief replied: Okay, I promised to make a scientific argument against polygamy (in whatever form), so here it is.

I hypothesize that if polygamy were globally encouraged in society, the advancement of homo-sapiens in terms of intellect would, albeit over a goodly number of generations, stagnate.

I am presenting the hypothesis with regards to polygny, but the same arguments apply to a lesser degree toward multiple males with a single female. These are the reasons for this hypothesis, and it requires allowance for some "givens":

1. Polygamists tend to be alpa males of the physical variety - this is a given
2. Polygnists naturally would choose the most beautiful specimens of womanhood. This argument is based upon the rule that states that alpha males are generally more prone to dating and mating with the head of the high school cheerleading squad than with the head of the debate team.
3. This practice is exhibited in such animal social packs as wild wolves, coyotes and big cats. The alpha male gets all the chicks; the lesser males are shoved to the periphery.
4. If the alpha male human prefers the stacked blonde (forgive the simplistic language, but I'm having a little bit of fun here), then he is less likely to mate with and procreate with the lesser females (regardless of their intellect).
5. This leaves the ancestors to be primarily alpha-physical, thereby slowly eliminating the alpha-intellectual and beta catagories as natural selection runs it's course.

This is extreme and assumes that polygamy would be a universal choice, but it presents a scientific basis for disallowing polygamy.

amynicole21 replied:
LOL! Of course, the stacked cheerleader would have a say in it, too. I for one would probably be more likely to go for Bill Gates than Fabio -

redchief replied:
Oh no Amy, Bill Gates would be the geek on the outside of society, and an alpha-male would already have chosen you, thereby eliminating your preference. Should Mr. Gates find the testicular fortitude to challenge Fabio (if indeed Fabio LIKES women), Fabio would simply kill or castrate him; such is the nature of the alpha-male of the physical variety. He doesn't compete; he just wins.

We'd still be living in caves and teepees too, since engineer types would not be bearing many, if any offspring.

I haven't had this much fun in a long time!

kit_kats_mom replied:
I dunno Ed. Did you take a gander at the fella that they just captured? I think it's quite a stretch to call him an alpha male.

redchief replied:
Ahh, but we aren't talking about the nutbag pedophilic polygamists our world allows to mature to adulthood. Our current society wouldn't be able to exist in my hypothical world. Jeffs would never have had a chance in the world I've just created. He'd be a virgin for life.

boyohboyohboy replied: I agree with Jennie, I think God makes it clear what He expects from us, and as a follower I have to say I agree.

My opinions then are based on religious faith I have.

coasterqueen replied:
I am never gonna get any work done at this rate. I'm so far behind I'm gonna be working late. This has been a very interesting day on this board.

ZandersMama replied: I personally think it would be great to have someone around to help with the dishes and keeping DH happy. lol. But if DH gets to play with more then one, it would have to work both ways......hmmmmmmmmmm......dont think the arrangement would work well here.

kit_kats_mom replied: just another thing to add to the discussion. Do those who feel that there isn't any reason that polygamy should be illegal also feel that gay marriage is ok? I'm sensing that a lot of those who disagree with polygamy do so based on their religion and their religions definition of marriage.

Please lets not really talk about gay marriage...another hot topic...but I'm sensing that the discussion thus far in relation to our feelings about polygamy, is basically that some of us just define marriage differently.

On a side note, I sure do wish Lauren would let me put her down. I have loads to type but one handed isn't cutting it. Now see, if I had another wife, I'd make her type for me.

coasterqueen replied:
Come on Lauren, let mommy play!

I'm not going to answer how I feel about gay marriage, but I know that religion doesn't play any part in either discussion for me.

redchief replied: Gay marriage is a myth propogated by the homosexual community in an effort to normalize the homsexual lifestyle.

mom2my2cuties replied:

luvmykids replied:
ITA

amynicole21 replied:
Yikes. I take offense to the word "myth." Also, it's not really answering her question

mckayleesmom replied:
OMG>....Im laughing so hard.

redchief replied:
Gotcha... I expected you to take offense sooner I'm sorry, I'm in a bit of an ornery, playful mood today.

By myth, I meant that marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman. The homosexual movement is attempting to redefine the very definition of marriage to forward their political position that homosexual relationships are normal and acceptable. Don't misunderstand me, I have no quarrel with the gay community insofar as whether or not they should be permitted to engage in their lifestyle. The only quarrel I have is when they try to jam their lifestyle down my throat and force me to call it "normal." Despite my light mood, I'm serious on this. My morals tell me that homosexuality is a deviant lifestyle; you can not force me to believe otherwise by changing the definition of marriage.

Brias3 replied: Oh, I don't take offense to this at all, no matter what my beliefs might be. I totally understand this was meant to be a funny, Amy

And yes, I agree....if someone wants to deal with 4x the headaches (I mean, joy! ) of marriage, then let them!

kimberley replied:

Cece00 replied:
Well, I personally, am NOT religious, but at the same time, I do not agree with gay marriage.

For all the reasons Ed gave, minus the religion.

mckayleesmom replied: I think its none of my business who gets married or to what sex. As long as they are consenting adults....its their choice.

ZandersMama replied:
Do you feel there is something not normal about homosexuality? Two people in love?

Crystalina replied: Here is my take on it and I hope I'm not repeating someone already. I didn't read the entire thread.

I don't care how many wives someone has but take care of the wives and kids yourself! I am only speaking of the huge Polygamist community that is (was) under Warren Jeffs. A very high percentage of that particulare community is on welfare. They have many many children which means alot of money going towards their familys.

Another thing is that (in that particular polygamist community) the "new brides" can be as young as 12 (if not younger!). If Warren Jeffs is so highly admired from the other polygamist communities then they more then likely all practice the same beliefs.

In my eyes they are glorifed pedaphiles. Warren Jeffs would actually give a nice young bride to any member of his church that he felt he owed gratitude to.

If it is a man of marrying age who marrys women of marrying age and they support their children then good for them. I have no problem with that.

luvmykids replied:
I still totally agree.

Jackie012007 replied: I can't find the post mentioning that episode on Dr. Phil but I saw that one and one where an EXTREMELY arrogant man was preaching to Dr. Phil his concept of "Poly-fidelity" and that was his justification for cheating on his very lovely, very miserable wife. The polygamy that I've read about or have seen things about seems like a glorified orgy... men being in control and loving it, women doing their bidding and submitting to their ridiculous sex drives. It's very degrading to women, and the children that are born of these relationships (especially the male children) are taught to treat women like sexual and domestic servants. The sex part.. yeah whatever, what you do in your bedroom is your business. But I do not agree with the emphasis on female servitude and alpha-maledom - I don't care if it's your religion or beliefs, it's degrading and it's bringing modern women back to 1800's "property" status









okay I feel better now

amynicole21 replied:
Sorry - I guess I've seen too much gay-bashing on here to take any comment like that lightly

gr33n3y3z replied: just bc I dont think something is right doesnt mean its not right for others
to each its own

My3LilMonkeys replied:
I view both polygamy and gay marriage in the same light - it's not for me, but I won't judge others for what they think is right for them. I am in favor of gay marriage and I've honestly never really thought about polygamy that much but I guess I'm in favor of that too.