Is Polygamy Next?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_III
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JapaneseKappa said:
What is this “next” business? Wouldn’t polygamy just be bringing back traditional marriage? (The Old Testament tradition, that is)
Click to expand...
Then I suppose you are not traditional unless you also bring back circumcision?

Jesus instituted a New Covenant, and there is no evidence that the New Covenant included polygamy. So we go by the traditions of the Church, not the traditions of the old synagogues.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
This thread originates in the United States, where polygamy is not lawful, though it is secretly practiced in some places.
Click to expand...
It’s not possible to marry more than one person civilly in the UK, the problem is that many mosques only conduct the religious ceremony and do not register it. De facto polygamy not de jure however
 
So who is to blame for what is happening in our country…70% of Americans call themselves Christian…the US has the largest Christian population in the world…also the largest single denomination in the US are Catholics…and out of that percentage you probably have around 24-25% who are regular church goers…and even among those there are some who agree with things like same sex marriage…abortion…etc…so in reality we’re probably a far more secular society than we think we are…and committed faithful Christians are probably much fewer than we think we are…so what is coming shouldn’t really surprise us.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Then I suppose you are not traditional unless you also bring back circumcision?

Jesus instituted a New Covenant, and there is no evidence that the New Covenant included polygamy. So we go by the traditions of the Church, not the traditions of the old synagogues.
Click to expand...
Indeed, all traditions were at some point new.
 
Peebo said:
So who is to blame for what is happening in our country…70% of Americans call themselves Christian…the US has the largest Christian population in the world…also the largest single denomination in the US are Catholics…and out of that percentage you probably have around 24-25% who are regular church goers…and even among those there are some who agree with things like same sex marriage…abortion…etc…so in reality we’re probably a far more secular society than we think we are…and committed faithful Christians are probably much fewer than we think we are…so what is coming shouldn’t really surprise us.
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with this.

It was the Catholic on the Supreme Court that voted in Roe v. Wade.

Two Catholics voted with three Jews to vote in same-sex marriage.

Joe Biden, a Catholic, officiated at a same-sex marriage.

We live in a post-Christian era and everybody knows it.

Many Catholics have yet to suspect how savage the world is now and will be in the future in part because they did not lift a finger to prevent it.
 
DaveBj said:
Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if polygamy were the next domino to fall 😦
Click to expand...
Since no one has ever offered a principled argument for same sex marriage then anything goes as long as someone “feels” that that anything is good for them.

What’s next for legalization: polygamy, incest, sure? Why limit marriage to human beings … want to marry your dog — let’s legalize beastiality.
 
o_mlly said:
Since no one has ever offered a principled argument for same sex marriage then anything goes as long as someone “feels” that that anything is good for them.

What’s next for legalization: polygamy, incest, sure? Why limit marriage to human beings … want to marry your dog — let’s legalize beastiality.
Click to expand...
I mean, this is the kind of thing you should only ever say to the choir, because if you trot it out in public you’ll get made fun of.

In the government’s eyes, marriage is a form of contract or mutual agreement. It will never be extended to things or people that are incapable of entering into agreements or contracts. You will never have bestial marriage in the US because animals cannot consent to contracts. You will never have inanimate object marriage in the US because inanimate objects cannot consent to contracts.

I don’t think there is a good constitutional argument against polygamy, but the pragmatic one is simply this:

Allowing polygamy requires non-trivial changes to the rights and responsibilities of marriage as conferred by the government.

To legalize same-sex marriage, all you have to do is eliminate reference to gender, from the rights and responsibilities. Since most of the rights and responsibilities were gender neutral to begin with (e.g. tax free inheritance of spouse’s property) making this change was trivial.

But there is no trivial way to update the responsibilities for polygamy. You can’t just say “everyone gets to make everyone else’s medical decisions” and have that be the end of it. You need to actually pick a method to decide who gets power of attorney.

Because the decisions are no longer trivial, polygamists will have a divided front, and be significantly less likely to actually change their legal status.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
In Italy a Muslim leader is pushing to legalize polygamy since same-sex unions are now legal. Is that a logical deduction? Is that next on the American marital agenda? Stay tuned.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/08/18/islamic-leader-wants-to-legalise-polygamy-in-italy/
Click to expand...
Actually this should be less disturbing

Since Polygamy is like divorce, it was once allowed so it is in a sense “less bad” theoretically.

Gay marriage was never okay

All biblically speaking of course.

So it is ironic that the more bad one might lead to the less, rather than the other way around lol.
 
JapaneseKappa said:
I mean, this is the kind of thing you should only ever say to the choir, because if you trot it out in public you’ll get made fun of.
Click to expand...
I suppose your advise would be good for anybody who is afraid to be politically incorrect?
 
edwest2 said:
Of course it’s next.

washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/07/10/heres-why-people-are-arguing-over-whether-polygamy-is-the-next-gay-marriage-debate/

Ed

Never politically correct.
Click to expand...
Also next is the tolerance and celebration of gratuitous public nudity.

newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/08/23/prospect-park-nude-shakespeare/

Call it galloping descent into national savagery. Even the bawdy Elizabethans or the ancient Romans performed their plays without displaying their genitals.
 
To be fair, polygamy IS traditional, whereas same-sex marriage is actually an innovation. Many cultures practiced homosexuality in some form or other, but none of them thought it was appropriate to pair off exclusive homosexual couples and call them married. See: Foucault “History of Sexuality.”

The reasoning that seems to motivate the acceptance of same-sex marriage appears to me to be:
  1. Love and consent are the primary grounds for marriage
  2. Sex/gender is arbitrary
  3. Therefore, any two people who love each other and consent should be allowed to marry
To me, if gender and sex are arbitrary, number of partners seems equally arbitrary, so I can understand how some people would see polygamous marriage as the “next” step in the ongoing “development” in our laws.

Honestly, one wife is MORE than enough for me!! 👍

Interestingly enough, I’ve read some Rabbinic opinions suggesting that polygamy is perfectly acceptable for Gentiles.
 
What are we referring to when we say “marriage”? By that I mean any number of people can have any type of religious marriage ceremony they want. Also, what the Church requires isn’t necessarily present in civil marriage either. So, I’m rather confused why the civil definitions need to share the major limitations of the religious definition.
 
HerCrazierHalf said:
What are we referring to when we say “marriage”? By that I mean any number of people can have any type of religious marriage ceremony they want. Also, what the Church requires isn’t necessarily present in civil marriage either. So, I’m rather confused why the civil definitions need to share the major limitations of the religious definition.
Click to expand...
Well apart from Ancient Egypt and Pre colonial North America
 
PumpkinCookie said:
To be fair, polygamy IS traditional, whereas same-sex marriage is actually an innovation. Many cultures practiced homosexuality in some form or other, but none of them thought it was appropriate to pair off exclusive homosexual couples and call them married. See: Foucault “History of Sexuality.”

The reasoning that seems to motivate the acceptance of same-sex marriage appears to me to be:
  1. Love and consent are the primary grounds for marriage
  2. Sex/gender is arbitrary
  3. Therefore, any two people who love each other and consent should be allowed to marry
To me, if gender and sex are arbitrary, number of partners seems equally arbitrary, so I can understand how some people would see polygamous marriage as the “next” step in the ongoing “development” in our laws.

Honestly, one wife is MORE than enough for me!! 👍

Interestingly enough, I’ve read some Rabbinic opinions suggesting that polygamy is perfectly acceptable for Gentiles.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you were to go off Rabbis and therefore for arguements sake ignore the NT and pretend only the OT is correct. One could argue much is permitted.

The main restrictions placed upon the gentiles beyond the simplest earliest laws are the Rabbinicsuggestion that when a group if gentiles makes a law that matches mosaic it becomes theirs for all time.

That seems a bit odd given the way societies actually develop…

So yes, if one were to attempt to be a righteous gentileand believed onky in the OT then you would be nit allowed SSM or incest, but multiple wives would more likely not be a big issue.
 
LethalMouse said:
Actually, if you were to go off Rabbis and therefore for arguements sake ignore the NT and pretend only the OT is correct. One could argue much is permitted.

The main restrictions placed upon the gentiles beyond the simplest earliest laws are the Rabbinicsuggestion that when a group if gentiles makes a law that matches mosaic it becomes theirs for all time.

That seems a bit odd given the way societies actually develop…

So yes, if one were to attempt to be a righteous gentileand believed onky in the OT then you would be nit allowed SSM or incest, but multiple wives would more likely not be a big issue.
Click to expand...
I’m not interested in polygamy personally, partially because I believe marriage should be about love, and I don’t think there is the necessary mutuality in a polygamous marriage for true love to exist. Now, if marriage is primarily about producing babies and organizing property rights, then I can see a solid argument for polygamy.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Also next is the tolerance and celebration of gratuitous public nudity.

newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/08/23/prospect-park-nude-shakespeare/

Call it galloping descent into national savagery. Even the bawdy Elizabethans or the ancient Romans performed their plays without displaying their genitals.
Click to expand...
This was going on in Eastern Europe before World War II. Boredom - one of the few secular sins.

Ed

Excuse me while I go out and not do something that will scare the majority of the masses.

Parts of the USA - the Uncivilized States of America.
 
HerCrazierHalf said:
What are we referring to when we say “marriage”? By that I mean any number of people can have any type of religious marriage ceremony they want. Also, what the Church requires isn’t necessarily present in civil marriage either. So, I’m rather confused why the civil definitions need to share the major limitations of the religious definition.
Click to expand...
The Priest acts as an agent of the State and for the Church.

Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top