Nothing bad about either of these two relationship types or any other variation as long as its what everyone involved wants...
One to many relationship! It's absolutely disgusting! Just saying.
I hear what you're saying but I've learn to tolerate (to some extent) that if consenting adults want to form whatever kind of relationship amongst themselves where all parties are willing then who am I to object...
_________________
_________________________________________________ BOWFull STR Fire level 102 -- ON A LONG BREAK..POSSIBLY FOREVER
whatever kind of relationship amongst themselves where all parties are willing then who am I to object...
Polyandry/polygamy etc.. lends itself to abuse of children and women. Well, does it seem right.. that the kids need to be subjected to this type of life?
FYI: I'm arguing for the right to be married, in general. Not the right to be married in a church. If they want to deny homosexuals their blessing to be married under their religion's name, fine. But they can't ban them from being married elsewhere.
I agree. I think some of the concern is that if a church refuses to marry a gay couple, they could be sued for discrimination. But, like you said, I'm sure theres ways around it.
penfold1992 wrote:
yeah and anyone that goes to a church should not eat any meat that comes from a pig, no tattoos or piercings, no one that has had a second marriage, anyone that works on the Sunday, female teachers and eat any seafood that doesn't have fins.
Anyone that is not a virgin nor married should be removed from the church, Oh and any women that speak in church should also be forced out of the church.
oh and women were created FOR man. Women are men's slaves.
Technically the 7th day of rest is on Saturday, not Sunday. (And I never have worked on Saturday's for that reason.)
Anyhow, as far as the rest of your post goes, I actually don't eat pork, or have tattoos, piercings, married multiple times, am a virgin, or eat unclean seafood.
Do I win?
Curiously though, where did the whole "no female teachers" thing come from? And I could go into detail about multiple women in the bible who were actually allowed to teach/talk in the church, but I'm lazy, so you know.
The Church itself a center for hypocrisy but that doesn't mean they don't have the right to decide who gets certain services and who gets booted out. It's a glorified social club and nothing more. If gay people want to be married under the name of the Christian church, then too bad. Apparently, they chose to ignore all the homophobic teachings of the Bible.. that's not the Church's fault, that's theirs. Getting married elsewhere is a whole different issue, however.
Objectively, getting married is simply making it legal for your assets to be tied with someone else's property. Your life insurance coverage, your tax deductions, etc.. all the merits that couples benefit from. As far as expressing your unwavering love and commitment to your partner -- that's just an extra. That is the modern definition of marriage. Love is not a requirement, just your signature. Religious groups can refuse service to people who don't meet their criteria but that right should only be within the boundaries of their own circle, not the the city clerk's office.
Although I'm all for democracy and voting, I honestly don't believe anyone else should have a say as to whether or not two consenting adults have the right to be married. The keywords: 'Consenting Adults' should be enough for the court to let them get married. Popular votes have nothing to do with it -- I don't care if 99% of the people in the US are against gay marriage. Unfortunately, most people have an inflated sense of entitlement. Every time a celebrity or an icon does something wrong, they're quick to demand an apology from that person even though the issue at hand has nothing to do with them. Same thing in gay marriage: they're not gay and they're not the ones getting married, yet they feel as if they should have a say in it.
The Church itself a center for hypocrisy but that doesn't mean they don't have the right to decide who gets certain services and who gets booted out. It's a glorified social club and nothing more. If gay people want to be married under the name of the Christian church, then too bad. Apparently, they chose to ignore all the homophobic teachings of the Bible.. that's not the Church's fault, that's theirs. Getting married elsewhere is a whole different issue, however.
Objectively, getting married is simply making it legal for your assets to be tied with someone else's property. Your life insurance coverage, your tax deductions, etc.. all the merits that couples benefit from. As far as expressing your unwavering love and commitment to your partner -- that's just an extra. That is the modern definition of marriage. Love is not a requirement, just your signature. Religious groups can refuse service to people who don't meet their criteria but that right should only be within the boundaries of their own circle, not the the city clerk's office.
Although I'm all for democracy and voting, I honestly don't believe anyone else should have a say as to whether or not two consenting adults have the right to be married. The keywords: 'Consenting Adults' should be enough for the court to let them get married. Popular votes have nothing to do with it -- I don't care if 99% of the people in the US are against gay marriage. Unfortunately, most people have an inflated sense of entitlement. Every time a celebrity or an icon does something wrong, they're quick to demand an apology from that person even though the issue at hand has nothing to do with them. Same thing in gay marriage: they're not gay and they're not the ones getting married, yet they feel as if they should have a say in it.
Joined: Oct 2012 Posts: 500 Location: In a mound of car parts and grease
*BlackFox wrote:
BuDo wrote:
whatever kind of relationship amongst themselves where all parties are willing then who am I to object...
Polyandry/polygamy etc.. lends itself to abuse of children and women. Well, does it seem right.. that the kids need to be subjected to this type of life?
Why does it have to lead to abuse? That's bad parenting it has nothing to do with the amount of wives or husbands.
Because.. "Polygamist leaders are notorious" for cases of abuse.
Btw:
Quote:
SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) — A Texas jury convicted polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs of child sexual assault Thursday in a case stemming from two young followers he took as brides in what his church calls "spiritual marriages." The 55-year-old head of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints stood stone-faced as the verdict was read.
Jeffs, who acted as his own attorney, faces up to life in prison. The jury went immediately into sentencing proceedings. They had deliberated on a verdict for more than three hours.
Prosecutors used DNA evidence to show Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and played an audio recording of what they said was him sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl. They also played audio recordings in which Jeffs was heard instructing young women on how to please him sexually.
Yet again bad parenting, just cause hes a scumbag and a polygamist doesn't mean they all are.
It doesn't matter how they are, It's still disgusting to think about. Seriously, polygamy provides an unstable relationship.. with an accompanying higher risk of abuse and exploitation. Btw: when you engage in relationships based on domination, and lack of choice, etc... people are not going to be happy.
Yet again bad parenting, just cause hes a scumbag and a polygamist doesn't mean they all are.
It doesn't matter how they are, It's still disgusting to think about. Seriously, polygamy provides an unstable relationship.. with an accompanying higher risk of abuse and exploitation. Btw: when you engage in relationships based on domination, and lack of choice, etc... people are not going to be happy.
What if they all like that? Maybe it's not a lack of choice.
What if they all like that? Maybe it's not a lack of choice.
I doubt that!.. Many people who live in polygamous households.. have little freedom of choice They are trapped by extreme poverty and violence. But like I said, as long as everyone involved is okay with it. Oh well, do whatever makes you happy.
Being in a polygamist relationship.... What do you think their lives are like? A "glamorous" lifestyle? @Azilius
Unless you can provide significant proof as to why polygamy is inherently bad (you can't), the statement is baseless. Providing cases where polygamists are bad or do bad things is irrelevant as it is not proof, rather a means to generalize.
Being in a polygamist relationship.... What do you think their lives are like? A "glamorous" lifestyle? @Azilius
Unless you can provide significant proof as to why polygamy is inherently bad (you can't), the statement is baseless. Providing cases where polygamists are bad or do bad things is irrelevant as it is not proof, rather a means to generalize.
I agree with this.... Unstable relationships are not sourced from the type of relationship but rather from the individuals within them.... And also a lot of children get abused or partners "have their dignity" robed from them in monogamous relationships...
I think Blackfox is equating any and all polygamous relationships to the practices of certain religious fundamentalist groups who have a bad track record when it comes to polygamy. The problem with these religious groups however isn't their polygamous relationships but rather their outdated belief system that is carried into it...
_________________
_________________________________________________ BOWFull STR Fire level 102 -- ON A LONG BREAK..POSSIBLY FOREVER
What if they all like that? Maybe it's not a lack of choice.
I doubt that!.. Many people who live in polygamous households.. have little freedom of choice They are trapped by extreme poverty and violence. But like I said, as long as everyone involved is okay with it. Oh well, do whatever makes you happy.
You don't have to be a... rocket-science to see what's on the horizon. Well, polygamy can work only in special circumstances, especially when all parties can "live in harmony" And nobody is forced into it. However, polygamy is a horrible practice.... In fact, It's all about "Control and Dominance" the more women a man acquires, the more he feels powerful. Seriously, polygamy always ends up with greed, selfishness, Kids get neglected. etc..
Well, polygamy can work only in special circumstances, especially when all parties can "live in harmony" And nobody is forced into it. However, polygamy is a horrible practice.... In fact, It's all about "Control and Dominance" the more women a man acquires, the more he feels powerful. Seriously, polygamy always ends up with greed, selfishness, Kids get neglected. etc..
First bold: True, however the same thought process applies to anything. Given certain or 'special' circumstances, anything can do anything. So this statement is irrelevant.
Second bold: Perhaps the only instances of polygamy you have seen have been about control and dominance, however it would be generalizing to say all of them are without having significant proof of such. The only real way to prove what you are saying is to have observed every single polygamist on the planet which we can assume you haven't.
While your argument is poorly constructed, I still see where you're coming from. Neglect of children is a serious issue and most adults in the world are probably not fit for a polygamous relationship due to jealousy, among other things. However it is still incorrect to absolutely say that polygamy is wrong or bad. Always leave room for the possibility of success..
Quote:
Polygamy is a risky take on relationships which can lead to several problems such as neglect of children, jealousy, abuse, and other serious problems.
Seems much more correct to me, still leaves the possibility of polygamists who are not terrible people.
i love the amazing atheist. Someone who is against using religion or race as a excuse or reason for ignorance. Even if i dont agree with him on everything he says
I ask this question, why are we focusing on this all to much? Isn't there bigger stuff we should be paying attention to? Did you guys also know that the same day prop 8 was being talked about in court, the govt. signed some shit to study snail sex. Yes snail sex. 800k of tax payers money to go to snail sex. idk what i get out of this post but still... SNAIL SEX!
_________________
Chars i have: SJSRO: NukerLover lvl 94 Inactive ZSZC Water: NukerLover: lvl 61 Inactive ESRO: RougeLover lvl 72: Dead BloodySRO: Cpt_Crucnh 84: Active
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Crumpets for Pres
