Can anyone name a single legitimate reason why polygamy is illegal?

this is so true you know we live in a sick culture when there is more enthusiasm for gay marriage than straight marriage, especially when the consequences of failed straight marriages are so great as see for example by the number of black boys in prison.

 

Yes the liberal agenda: abortion divorce welfare feminism cheapened marriage and love itself. Think about it, if you are limited to sex with one person you learn to love and get along with that person or your life is a hell. In liberal lala land you don't have to develop that skill, and it is the essential skill of civilization.

 

And you get to define what love is or is not?

Seems, within the scope of the conversation, that all parties are fully committed. In the case of a patriarchal system the man is committed to the women, the women to the man, the women to one another, the adults to the children.

Romantic love is a wonderful thing but it doesn't put food on the table or clothes on the kids.

Your moralizing is not what this thread is about. That you consider plural marriage "immoral" is not a valid reason why it should be illegal. It is an institution that has existed since the birth of humanity. Let us not forget that the Bible's David had at least 7 wives.

 

I hope you're not right about this, but I suppose it's something that should be examined.

 

This thread was not to be about God or the Bible.....but since you bring it up, David suffered greatly for his plural marriage. The Bible tells of the jealousy, deceit, rape and yes, and even murder that took place due to his fleshly cravings. His son Absalom tried to overthrow David due to resentments built up. It could very well have cost David his life! It did cost Absalom his. If you want to use the Bible for a moral anchor we could introduce it to this thread.

 

Please.

Moses 2
Solomon 'thousands'
Saul 2
Abraham 2

Plural marriage has existed since the birth of humanity.

 

They've been famous for it for many centuries. American soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan who complained about the Muslim commanders indulging in their tradition were told to keep quiet and not report it. Here's a Bing search on that. Don't know how well it will work.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Ameri...an+commnaders+raping+boys&pc=MOZI&form=MOZSBR

Even more disgusting is American soldiers being punished for interfering with the 'custom'.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/military/article32969865.html


Martland, 33, was awarded two Bronze Star medals, including one for valor, during his time at JBLM. He likely will be discharged in November because the discipline handed to him for assaulting the Afghan made him a target for Army downsizing. Veteran soldiers with negative performance reviews in their service records are being culled from the ranks as part of the post-Iraq War drawdown.

The case sheds light on the tensions that can build when U.S. soldiers are told to tolerate foreign customs that are repugnant to them.

A one-star general reprimanded Martland after the September 2011 incident for a “flagrant departure from the integrity, professionalism and even-tempered leadership I expect from all soldiers of this command, but especially a Special Forces professional.”


Oh noes, we mustn't offend the vermin. Of course the Gay Right propagandists are at the forefront of spreading the nonsense about 'enlightened tolerant Islam] and 'Golden Ages N Stuff'; they can't even criticize it today, it isn't PC, you know.

 

just like with children, there is a max one can collect

 

Yes it parallels the way animals behave but it does not seem well-suited for human beings

 

I don't define love the dictionary does and it will usually make reference to one on one love in a sexual or romantic context

 

Who cares if the parties are fully committed. Half of Germany was fully committed to the Nazis that does not make it right

 

Romantic love is a wonderful thing probably why we sing about it more than anything else therefore you can assume it is a motivation to put food on the table more than anything else could be

 

Many things have existed since the beginning of humanity but plural marriage has largely vanished as unnatural and animalistic

 

a lot of people live modest lives without buying clothes and expensive stuff and entertainment every week.

Why are the laws set up with such high payments? There are divorce cases where the kid just needs food, new clothes every month or two, like they normally get.

Specifically, why is one parent more responsible just because they don't live with them-I highly doubt you payed 20k-30k a year for them.

 

There is more to the law than lawsuits.

As per your anecdote--- What happens to social security with multiple partners when old partners die and new partners are added? It is arguably not the same when one partner dies and only has one spouse and when they have several, possibly including others of the same sex. How do you gauge the investment in the relationship between partners of varying lengths of time? And so on...

 

Yes is has.....so has incest, bestiality, robbery, mayhem and murder. Just because this one thing may sound pleasing to you, doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences. Those consequences are spelled out in all the scriptures you allude to. Jacob and Esau are the consequences from which we are greatly effected to this day. Saul eventually gave into insanity. Solomon, though he had an abundance of wisdom, failed to follow his own words. If you read the Song of Solomon, however, you can discover the blessings of "one man, one women". That is how marriage was meant from the beginning.
Just because you have perhaps not experienced personally the failings of polygamy, does not mean those failings do not "magnify" other failings. That is what the Word of God is there for. Try to understand the message God delivers through it. I did not bring God into this thread.....but somehow He always makes His presence known.

 

We aren't a 'Christian majority nation'. The divorce rate among practicing Christians isn't '50%'. That myth has been exploded long ago. You're right, the divorce rate among practicing Christians is a lot lower than among non-Christians.

 

In some religions the 'polygamy' is usually a result of times of war and having lots of widows around. For Jewish and Christian 'polygamy', there are scriptures requiring the care of 'your brother's widow' and the like, so the 'multiple wives' thing isn't what many think it is talking about, it involved social and legal responsibilities. That is no longer necessary and those pushing 'polygamy' these days are simply sicko sexual deviants of one sort or another, and they also have a propensity for raping underage children as well; they don't like those pesky 'age of consent' laws any more than the single spouse laws.

 

It averaged almost $3,000 per month when you add the child support payment to my ex-wife, plus: music lessons, sports lessons, food, clothes, medical insurance, medical expenses, cell phones, etc.

My ex kept no food at her house, so I had to take the kids out for dinner.

 

Since you were already paying to support them with food and in other ways, isn't the court ordered payments just using kids as an excuse for money? It seems preposterous when a person is supporting them already to give a person tens of thousands of dollars a year.

Do you agree with me the system is a lie? By arguing against the concept of child support, I'm not defending neglect or anything, but based on this story, child support payments seems like a euphemism for using minors as a business-not about not neglecting them.

 

This is only opinion and shows nothing as to why we should or should not allow polygamy legally.

 

What should be examined? A false connection of pedophila to anything one feels is too icky? They tried that BS with gay marriage as well, and well homosexuals in general.

 

No not really how many species do you see where more than two mate for life? There I see nothing out in the animal kingdom to match how humans approach marriage. Sure we have animals that mate male and female for life, but unlike humans they is no cheating or divorce for them. I guess we could look at hive type insects for examples of polyandry, still no concept of divorce, separation or all the tings humans do in their relationships. We can only compare aspects of our interactions, but overalll we are unique.

 

Major correlation/causation fallacy here. Cults and extremists religious nuts, whether monogamy based or polygamy based, have always done ****ed up things. You need to be able to support this with data that is not taken only from these types.

 

Agreed. It is a rational and justified opinion. But it's probably not significant enough to impact the law.