Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

I think that is the difference between lust and love. But the general consensus of hard-core monogamists is that it is impossible for a person to be totally in love with more than one person at a time, or for that person to totally commit themselves to more than one person in an institution such as marriage.

I think that sort of thinking is fundamentally flawed, because it is unfair and impossible to tell someone else what that person is feeling when the person knows that they are feeling something different. You can't dictate love to other people--it's not fair, it's not right, and it's not possible. I think that the hard-core monogamists believe this way because it's how THEY feel inside, and it's what works for THEM, and of course they see it in practice so much, so they believe it to be true for absolutely everyone.

The thing is, though, everyone's different in different ways, so not everyone is going to want or need a monogamist fit in their love lives.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

My guess would be because of the role of women. In polygamy, women are considered to be property. Not to mention, the people who made this law were non-Mormons who viewed marriage as being between a man and a woman. These were the same people who had forced the Mormons to go West.

Edit: This may help.

_________________

Because it is only a guess I can't take that as complete fact. I've seen people who support it and they don't seem to think like that at first.

But if it is...

Then I would never support it. People are God's creation, not objects.

P.S. I'm sorry, but could someone please answer my question? Thank you very much.

That's total prejudice. I'm not saying that there aren't people who would act and feel that way, but to say that all polygamists see women as property completely neglects the people who actually devote themselves to all the multiple spouses and truly love them and respect them, as a regular couple would in a monogamous marriage.

Moreover, it shows further prejudice to believe that polygamy always equals one man+many wives. That's the dictionary definition of polygyny, while the opposite (one woman+many husbands) is the definition of polyandry (or polyamory), but polygamy encompasses all group marriages, despite the number of each sex involved.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

Hey, I actually know the answer to a question on here!

Matthew 22:23-32

I do not have a prejudical bone in my body. That was not meant to be prejudice, if it was taken as such, I apologize.

_________________

Great Jorb, Smorky!

_________________

As PianoMan said, you can't say that because it means that ALL polygamists view women as property, as though that is inherent in the definition. And it's not.

So you're saying that as long as women are respected as women and no property, polygamy is fine with you?

_________________

Thank you Smorky!

This now gives me two ideas.

Perhaps marriage isn't as important as people say it is. Because if it's forgotten, then what is it's purpose beyond our earthly state?

And the other is, what is the purpose of a boy and girl falling in love then?

To create children, and to fulfill those emotional and physical needs that all men and women have. Genesis 2 all over again.

Marriage, then, is the means by which we are to carry out that calling, and, in giving ourselves to each other, engage in this act of self-giving. It is a reflection of Christ's relationship to his Church. As he gave himself for us and to us (in the Sacraments), so too are a man and a woman to give each other for and to their spouse (Ephesians 5).

_________________

I have mixed feelings. On one hand, if it takes place between consenting adults..... blah blah blah..... then it's no one's business.

On the other hand, there's a sinister patriarchal (and possibly mysogynous) structure to polygamous marriages that is hard to ignore. In that, a polygamous marriage is like a pyramid - the Supreme Patriarch on top, and his wives beneath him in status. Since there's several of them and only one of him, there would be very little chance that these wives could become equal partners with their husband.

I'm not saying that the monogamous tradition has insured the equality of women in marriage - it hasn't - but there is a much better chance for two people to be equal partners than for several people.

EDIT: Found something of interest - the Utah Attorney General's report on polygamy. I only skimmed through it, but it does say that polygamy exasparates child abuse and domestic violence in Mormon splinter-groups - partly because of the patrarchal dynamic, and partly because of some their religious beliefs.


-------



On the legal note, I couldn't seem to find any info on how polygamy is damaging as a criminal behavior - unless it involves minors, of course. The Wiki says that since splinter-groups of Mormonism are often not married formally, the only way that they can be prosecuted is by adultery laws, and "unlawful co-habitation" laws.

Good grief - laws like this still exist, outside of Sharia?

In terms of the backlash against Mormon polygamy, Wiki also says:



What the real root of this outcry was...... who knows. My reckoning: people probably saw monogamy as the accepted norm - and that accepted norm may have its roots in the Christian rules on marriage - and any deviation to that was seen as a threat to the fundemental values of society.


----------



Hmmm, possibly. However, the Wiki has something interesting to say here:



Kinda sounds like the husband is a free man in this situation, and the woman is bound for an eternity to her lord and master.

(Yeah okay, I'm being a smartarse. But that rule - and that whole "one rule for men, another for women" dynamic - strikes me as very unsavoury).

But realize that this is only within the LDS social structure. Polygamy can be and is also practiced by people who were sociolized outside of the LDS church and way of thinking. These are the people that your statement ignores--the people who would practice polyandry or a version of polygamy that contains many people of both genders....or just people practicing polygyny where the one man is truly in love with all his wives and earnestly respects them all equally.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

Certainly, if such happy polygamous marriages actually exist, then more power to them. Though I'd still be very wary of polygamy, for the reasons that I outlined in the first part of my last post - very wary. (When I'm talking about polygamy, I mean its "one man - many wives" definition - which is the technically correct one).

But I guess ignorance of the practice might have coloured my opinion in places. Because you'd won't hear about polygamy's virtues from the media or even from government/NGO reports - only largely the negative points. I reckon that the only way that you can get an untainted picture of polygamy is by meeting polygamists themselves. But that'll probably never happen for me.

I read a book called the Silver Brumby... Or maybe it was a sequal, whatever. The main character, a horse, had multiple mates. Now, I know it was a horse, but it really seemed like he loved each of them evenly. So polygamy doesn't really bother me that much.
I am very glad I read that book. It taught me life lessons.

_________________
NOT A SIGNATURE!

No it's not. You're thinking of polygyny.



It already has, believe it or not.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

ARGH! Yes, of course! Sorry, my head's not screwed on properly today.



:

O rly? Care to elaborate?

I happen to be in love with two completely wonderful men, and we're all three comfortable with the idea of being in a polygamous relationship with one another. My love them is not any sort of rivalry--I love them both equally, and I could never choose between the two of them. They both mean so much to me and enrich my life in ways I could have never previously imagined. And yes, I realize that there will be unique challenges that I wouldn't find in a monogamous relationship--but I'm prepared to face any such challenges as they arise.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

Cool. Definately, if any polygamous relationship is in the spirit of mutual respect and love, I can't see a problem in it. I wish you and your beaux all the best, PMG.

I see nothing wrong with polygamy other than that others do.

_________________

It all depends on if you believe that you can love more than one person.

Wow, you should consider yourself very lucky to have such a great relationship with two people. I wish the three of you the best.

_________________

I consider myself very lucky for many reasons (living in a more advanced society, education, wealth, etc.), this relationship being one of the chief reasons.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

Nevertheless, just because you are in a three way relationship, it does not mean that such relationships are appropriate or moral. I know of someone who was in a three-way relationship that did not work, and I would think his experience would be equally valid.

What I mean to say is, I don't think, "I'm doing it and enjoying it, so that makes it okay," constitutes a valid justification. After all, what if that argument was used by those Homeland Security guys?

_________________

How about, "I'm doing it, enjoying it, and it's not hurting anyone"?

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

It still doesn't make it right.

_________________

Then what makes it wrong?

_________________

So a man will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and the two will become one body (Genesis 2:24).

And he must have only one wife (1 Timothy 3:2).

_________________

But that would require me to be Christian and believe as you believe in religion for you to convince me with such an argument.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

Ah, but if God did in fact say these things and intended for people to live by them, then regardless of what you say you believe, the standard would still be in place.

All I'm saying is that it's going to take more than, "It works okay for me," to convince me that it is indeed good, right, and salutary.

_________________

And all I'M saying is that it's going to take more than "My Christian version of God prohibits it!" to convince me that you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any authority to dictate love to me.

Since when is it wrong to love?

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!