polygamy

[A_Few_Good_Men]

The problem is this: Say a Muslim man or a Mormon converts to Christianity and he has more than one wife [maybe as many as four or five] and they all have children by him. And let’s say all his wives decide to convert as well. Then what?

 

[eichenb2]

The problem is this: Say a Muslim man or a Mormon converts to Christianity and he has more than one wife [maybe as many as four or five] and they all have children by him. And let’s say all his wives decide to convert as well. Then what?

una buena pregunta

 

[A_Few_Good_Men]

Further, in the OT it was impossible for a man to commit adultery UNLESS he had sexual relations with another man’s wife or with a woman who was pledged to be married. Dueteronomy 22:28-30 does not stipluate whether it mattered whether the he was already married or not if he happened to have sex with a woman who was in neither of the above categories!

 

[Tosk]

Further, in the OT it was impossible for a man to commit adultery UNLESS he had sexual relations with another man’s wife or with a woman who was pledged to be married. Dueteronomy 22:28-30 does not stipluate whether it mattered whether the he was already married or not if he happened to have sex with a woman who was in neither of the above categories!

Obviously that situation is less than ideal. You will find a lot of examples of things that were permitted in the OT that are no longer permissible, so I am not sure were you are going with this.

 

[eichenb2]

Let me try to predict the response from the faithful catholics who will respond. They will say that the Church teaches that polygamy is morally wrong. My response is that the church is not the state and if “homosexual marriage” is allowed by the state, there can be no rational objection to polygamy. Perhaps men are naturally inclined to be polygamous.

 

[A_Few_Good_Men]

I’m trying to compare what the State allows [both here in the UK and the USA and most Western countries] and what the Bible actually says.

For example: many Hollywood celebrities [women] have either used adoption agencies or ferility treatment [Gerri Halliwell, I believe] to have children without ANY desire to have a stable relationship, or even marriage. They can do this because they have the financial power [money!]. to do so. So it’s money that dictates morality!

 

[Tosk]

Let me try to predict the response from the faithful catholics who will respond. They will say that the Church teaches that polygamy is morally wrong. My response is that the church is not the state and if “homosexual marriage” is allowed by the state, there can be no rational objection to polygamy. Perhaps men are naturally inclined to be polygamous.

That is just the thing if you allow gay “marriage” there are a lot of “marriages” that you can’t logically deny. Not polyandry, polygamy, incest, or nonsexual relationships. In the end there really is no reason to have a ceremony at all or have an institution called marriage.

 

[A_Few_Good_Men]

Re:Tosk

In the OT there was no such thing as a marriage ceremony; it was defined by the culture and the circumstances [look at Deuteronomy 21:1014].

 

[Tosk]

Re:Tosk

In the OT there was no such thing as a marriage ceremony; it was defined by the culture and the circumstances [look at Deuteronomy 21:1014].

In the OT there was no such thing as toilet paper either, but I have no desire to follow that practice.

 

[eichenb2]

Obviously that situation is less than ideal. You will find a lot of examples of things that were permitted in the OT that are no longer permissible, so I am not sure were you are going with this.

Are these things “no longer permissible” because the Church says so, only? If this is so, why does the state care? Where am I going with this? Hmmm. Let me see if it I can lay it out.

1. The Church does not dictate to the State morality. I do not necessarily agree that this is good, but it is true; at least in the western, post-christian world.
2. If one can make the claim that the state should allow “homosexual marriage”, there is no reason that the state can raise objection to polygamous marriage. Sure one can say that the state can make a law against it, but that would merely be legal positivism. This sort of law could and probably could be challenged on the basis that state has no right to dictate morality.
3. Ultimately, the state, based on this progression will have to give up legally sanctioning marriage.

 

[eichenb2]

In the OT there was no such thing as toilet paper either, but I have no desire to follow that practice.

they used leaves…so, in principal, they did

 

[A_Few_Good_Men]

In the OT there was no such thing as toilet paper either, but I have no desire to follow that practice.

Marriage seemed to have been more important [and still is!] than toilet paper! I don’t believe they had sanitory towels either!

 

[manualman]

The interesting thing about the scriptures is that ALL of the polygamous characters in it demonstrated with their very lives why it is contrary to Natural Law. The Bible is the story of God and man. As Christians, we do not see all biblical heros the way muslims see Muhammed! Our heros are flawed and broken men (Jesus and his Immaculate Mother excepted, of course). They tell the story of why we needed a Savior. It is irrational to point to OT heros and say “they did it, it must be OK.”

This very thread is another example of why it is so crucial to be catholic. Once you wander off and start to trust in your own judgement, you can convinced yourself of nearly anything! The prohibition against polygamy in catholicism is NOT disciplinary like prohibiting the eating of meat on Lenten Fridays. It is an inherent moral issue.

I’m pretty sure this 2,000 year old church has had some polygamist converts over the years! It seems like a tough question, but it really isn’t. What’s worse, being a kid whose father suddently becomes a visitor and no longer any sort of ‘husband’ to the mother or a kid who grow up watching his father spread his limited love and affection amongst multiple wives with the inevitable pain and suffering that inherent betrayal inflicts on those women? IMO, it is less abusive to the women and the children to (upon conversion) stick with the original wife and sever ties with the others. He must support the raising of those kids, but he cannot string their mothers along as second class women.

I’m sure this offends modern sensibilities (how dare you judge them, just let them be happy!). The thing is that you cannot, by definition, be happy when you are tied to self-destrictive behavior! There is no such thing as a happy drug addict. No such thing as a happy homosexual couple. No such thing as happy polygamists. All three of these groups will protest my statement, but tough. Reality hurts, just not as bad as ignoring reality does.

How sad that we even have to argue this after all these years.

 

[eichenb2]

The interesting thing about the scriptures is that ALL of the polygamous characters in it demonstrated with their very lives why it is contrary to Natural Law. The Bible is the story of God and man. As Christians, we do not see all biblical heros the way muslims see Muhammed! Our heros are flawed and broken men (Jesus and his Immaculate Mother excepted, of course). They tell the story of why we needed a Savior. It is irrational to point to OT heros and say “they did it, it must be OK.”

This very thread is another example of why it is so crucial to be catholic. Once you wander off and start to trust in your own judgement, you can convinced yourself of nearly anything! The prohibition against polygamy in catholicism is NOT disciplinary like prohibiting the eating of meat on Lenten Fridays. It is an inherent moral issue.

I’m pretty sure this 2,000 year old church has had some polygamist converts over the years! It seems like a tough question, but it really isn’t. What’s worse, being a kid whose father suddently becomes a visitor and no longer any sort of ‘husband’ to the mother or a kid who grow up watching his father spread his limited love and affection amongst multiple wives with the inevitable pain and suffering that inherent betrayal inflicts on those women? IMO, it is less abusive to the women and the children to (upon conversion) stick with the original wife and sever ties with the others. He must support the raising of those kids, but he cannot string their mothers along as second class women.

I’m sure this offends modern sensibilities (how dare you judge them, just let them be happy!). The thing is that you cannot, by definition, be happy when you are tied to self-destrictive behavior! There is no such thing as a happy drug addict. No such thing as a happy homosexual couple. No such thing as happy polygamists. All three of these groups will protest my statement, but tough. Reality hurts, just not as bad as ignoring reality does.

How sad that we even have to argue this after all these years.

How do you know that? Wow, talk about cultural arrogance. I don’t protest your statements, as much as I pity them and the narrow-minded nature of them.

 

[eichenb2]

The interesting thing about the scriptures is that ALL of the polygamous characters in it demonstrated with their very lives why it is contrary to Natural Law. The Bible is the story of God and man. As Christians, we do not see all biblical heros the way muslims see Muhammed! Our heros are flawed and broken men (Jesus and his Immaculate Mother excepted, of course). They tell the story of why we needed a Savior. It is irrational to point to OT heros and say “they did it, it must be OK.”

This very thread is another example of why it is so crucial to be catholic. Once you wander off and start to trust in your own judgement, you can convinced yourself of nearly anything! The prohibition against polygamy in catholicism is NOT disciplinary like prohibiting the eating of meat on Lenten Fridays. It is an inherent moral issue.

I’m pretty sure this 2,000 year old church has had some polygamist converts over the years! It seems like a tough question, but it really isn’t. What’s worse, being a kid whose father suddently becomes a visitor and no longer any sort of ‘husband’ to the mother or a kid who grow up watching his father spread his limited love and affection amongst multiple wives with the inevitable pain and suffering that inherent betrayal inflicts on those women? IMO, it is less abusive to the women and the children to (upon conversion) stick with the original wife and sever ties with the others. He must support the raising of those kids, but he cannot string their mothers along as second class women.

I’m sure this offends modern sensibilities (how dare you judge them, just let them be happy!). The thing is that you cannot, by definition, be happy when you are tied to self-destrictive behavior! There is no such thing as a happy drug addict. No such thing as a happy homosexual couple. No such thing as happy polygamists. All three of these groups will protest my statement, but tough. Reality hurts, just not as bad as ignoring reality does.

How sad that we even have to argue this after all these years.

Let us not forget that this cultural perspective on polygamy is brought to us by a society (western) that is legitimizing sodomy, which is a sin EXPLICITY condemned by the Bible. Yet, polygamy is NOT clearly condemned and this is percieved a the worst of evils.
I will not even make reference to the fornication and adultery which is openly practised. It is rather disgusting.

 

[GraceDK]

Let us not forget that this cultural perspective on polygamy is brought to us by a society (western) that is legitimizing sodomy, which is a sin EXPLICITY condemned by the Bible. Yet, polygamy is NOT clearly condemned and this is percieved a the worst of evils.
I will not even make reference to the fornication and adultery which is openly practised. It is rather disgusting.

Eichen.
Our perspective on polygami is not only formed by western society primarily but it comes from Christian tradition, from a God who has revealed himself to us and thereby shown us who we are in our dignity and what the true nature of love is. Polygami goes against this love, which can be tested by merely asking your self: would I like to share sexually and intimately the man/woman that I love with one or more other individuals? Everyone of us cringes at this assault on our deepest longing to be unconditionally loved in purity and selfgiving. This is also the destiny of man.
Contrary to love is every kind of abuse of sexuality. That is what the Church also teaches, which is why the Church must stand strong both against islam and secularism, Islam having use and dominion at its core, and secularISM which has moral relativism and pleasure seeking at its core.
Christ teaches man about his/her true identity, which is to love God and one another, not using one another… but to be holy like God is Holy.

I sense that you use sarcasm to say there is hypocrisy in us for saying polygami is wrong, and omitting to mention other serious sins. But please understand that we also see fornication, masturbation, adultery, prostitution, gay-sex and every kind of extra-marital sexual life to be a sin and thus a hell man creates for himself in this world. God is compassionate… He hates the sin but He loves the sinner. Every sin makes us into lawbreakers… thus if you say a lie you are in the same group as the fornicator… and you must bow down and receive the Blood of Christ in atonement for your sins.
This is what gives us humilty. Without Him we are nothing. All that belongs to us is our sin. All that is Good, belongs to God.

Peace be with you… and thank you for openly sharing with us that you are looking into Catholicism. Truth is not found in a set of rules nor in a book, nor even in an umma or a church… no… Truth is a Person

 

[eichenb2]

Polygami goes against this love, which can be tested by merely asking your self: would I like to share sexually and intimately the man/woman that I love with one or more other individuals? Everyone of us cringes at this assault on our deepest longing to be unconditionally loved in purity and selfgiving."

I am a man and I would not share my wife. I have not asked every man, though. By the way, who is the “everyone” that you mentioned? Do mean all people in all places at all times? You have to understand that Islam is seen as a general way of life that is adaptable, in principle, to all people in all places at all times. Do you mean that everyone is all woman? How do you know that “Everyone of us cringes”? Have you asks everyone? What if you met a Muslim woman who encouraged her husband to marry an 2nd wife? How would change you view? Would you just dismiss her as brainwashed, in the same culturally snobbish manner that I have heard others on CAF use? I hope not.

 

[apromisemade]

Heck, I visited a community in Guatemala where women are allowed to have more than one husband .

I do think there is a good case to be made for de-criminalizing polygamy. You could very easily argue religious freedom. But then again not everyone who does it does so out of religious conviction. While we hear plenty of stories of religious cults where underage girls are forced to marry older men, there are plenty of perfectly healthy polygamous families out there, as is evident by the healthy and well-balanced adults who can attest to growing up in a polygamous family and having a good experience and thereby chose to raise their families in a like manner.

 

[eichenb2]

Heck, I visited a community in Guatemala where women are allowed to have more than one husband .

I do think there is a good case to be made for de-criminalizing polygamy. You could very easily argue religious freedom. But then again not everyone who does it does so out of religious conviction. While we hear plenty of stories of religious cults where underage girls are forced to marry older men, there are plenty of perfectly healthy polygamous families out there, as is evident by the healthy and well-balanced adults who can attest to growing up in a polygamous family and having a good experience and thereby chose to raise their families in a like manner.

Good points! By the way, let me state that I am not proposing that polygamy should be legalized. I AM proposing that Catholics who support legalizing “homosexual marriage” are hypocritical.

 

[GraceDK]

I am a man and I would not share my wife. I have not asked every man, though. By the way, who is the “everyone” that you mentioned? Do mean all people in all places at all times? You have to understand that Islam is seen as a general way of life that is adaptable, in principle, to all people in all places at all times. Do you mean that everyone is all woman? How do you know that “Everyone of us cringes”? Have you asks everyone? What if you met a Muslim woman who encouraged her husband to marry an 2nd wife? How would change you view? Would you just dismiss her as brainwashed, in the same culturally snobbish manner that I have heard others on CAF use? I hope not.

Eichen, you know that I am a Catholic and as such I believe in the Triune God as revealed in the Bible and fully and finally in Christ. Christ is who God really is… also with what He has to tell man about man’s own identity and purpose.
From that perspective I have to say the words you might find “snobbish”. I read this on a post card today:
“The more Christian you become, the more you become a human being, but you never become more than a human being”. I believe that a person who lives and breathes in Christ is a person who lives most fully in the purpose that God has in mind for us. That person lives more in Reality than a person who does not know the God who created him, nor where he is headed.
That means that a Muslim woman who accepts to lay in one room and listen to her husband having intercourse with another woman, may not feel that this could be different, but I do believe it is objectively true that it is below her human dignity to have to share her husband, just like its below her husband’s dignity to have multiple wives. This is said from a Christian perspective.
You do not advocate relativism… neither do I. There are things that are wrong and things that are right. I believe that people who conform to sinful ways have in some way or the other been deceived about what the true purpose of life and religion is. It must be so.
If you believe that no one is “brainwashed”, as you choose to call it, then you must also believe there is no Truth.
As a religious person I believe that some people live more or less blind or seeing, according to the standards of the revelation I believe in.
I hope you understand this reply.

Salam