Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The definition of polygamy is one man married to multiple women. Polyandry is the reverse. There is no word for men being married to multiple other men, women being married to multiple other women, or humans being married to animals.


Did the centuries old definition of marriage stop them from changing it?

Believe me, if this ever went as a charter challenge, it would be struck down. That's why the BC government is afraid to charge those in Bountiful.

Once you charge them they have the right to fight it and they've already said they'd mount a charter challenge and that they thought allowing gay marriage was a big step towards their own goals of legalized plural marriages.

You can bet that a number of Muslim organizations would also join in the charter challenge.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess you are right. Also I checked dictionary.com, and the meaning of polygamy is wider than I thought. Bigamy is the word that I was defining.
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bleatmop wrote:
crazymamma wrote:
Bleatmop wrote:
From a religious standpoint, if you get married more than once, even with a divorce, isn't that polygamy? I mean, a religious marriage is about the joining of souls and till death do us part, right? So, if you go and get married again after a divorce (not a widowing), then aren't you technically a polygamist under god's rules?


Well of course you can get around this can't you? When you are joined by the church there is the assumption of commitment to the marriage. If a partner can prove lack of commitment then an annulment can be secured. There are a few other reasons for an annulment, but to be honest its not my area. So far I haven't felt the need to Nullify my hubby.


Does the church provide annulments? More importantly, does god?



I can't get all biblical and quote you chapter and verse, but yes the church can provide an annulment. I know adultery is still grounds for one. Being married to someone who is a bigamist is another. I remember there also being grounds for misrepresentation, serious deceit. It was awhile ago that my Padre explained it and it basically came down to the three A's. Abuse, Addiction, Adultery.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If three consenting adults want to form a union I don't understand why libertarians would object to it.
Kafer





Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 33
Reputation: 17.1Reputation: 17.1

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette,

I wasn't trying to be right, although I don't mind when it happens. I was actually looking up the word Polyandry, seeing as I didn't know what exactly it meant (I got a general idea from your use of the word) and I just happened upon the word Polygyny. Thanks to you I learned something new today and I'm sure it will come in handy at some point, just not too sure when, lol
Lar_drewstar





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 34
Reputation: 19.8Reputation: 19.8
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
If three consenting adults want to form a union I don't understand why libertarians would object to it.


As a libertarian I would probably support it if it was allowed despite my own views that multiple marriages wouldnt be beneficial to anybody. However it would only be acceptable to me if certain definitions about the family were clarified, such as adoption for instance. Can a 'family' of more than 2 parents be allowed to adopt? Get tax breaks? etc etc... unless legal complications are sorted out it would be impractical to implement polygamy as a legitamte institution. Plus the public would never agree too it regardless..
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lar_drewstar wrote:
Plus the public would never agree too it regardless..


You sure about that? I'm pretty sure that similar things were said about gay marriage in the 80's.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lar_drewstar wrote:
despite my own views that multiple marriages wouldnt be beneficial to anybody


Why wouldn't it be beneficial to the three people who willfully entered into the union?

One could argue that it is biologically beneficial too since more dominant males would be able to secure more breeding partners.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plantguy wrote:
Because no one deserves that much pain.

I hear that!

-Mac
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
If three consenting adults want to form a union I don't understand why libertarians would object to it.

I don't object... Muslims don't object. Hindus don't object. Since Christianity used to be polygamous, they shouldn't object either.

-Mac
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I predict that eventually, civil unions will be allowed for such things.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
Lar_drewstar wrote:
despite my own views that multiple marriages wouldnt be beneficial to anybody


Why wouldn't it be beneficial to the three people who willfully entered into the union?

One could argue that it is biologically beneficial too since more dominant males would be able to secure more breeding partners.
People willfully do cocaine, meth, and heroine. Just because a person thinks they know what they are doing, does not mean they are right, or that it will be beneficial. Only time will tell if multiple marriages benefit, hurt, or are neutral to society. Most likely it has been tried at some point, and I think that since no modern societies have multiple marriage, that should give you your answer right there. Some seventh century societies still try it.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Some seventh century societies still try it.

I still think plantguy nailed the biggest reason against it.

-Mac
dotconservative





Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 49
Reputation: 26.2Reputation: 26.2Reputation: 26.2

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Craig wrote:
If three consenting adults want to form a union I don't understand why libertarians would object to it.

I don't object... Muslims don't object. Hindus don't object. Since Christianity used to be polygamous, they shouldn't object either.

-Mac


To quote Michael Coren from a Western Standard So-Con vs. Libertarian back and forth,

"The point about polygamy in scripture is that God shows how it doesn't work. He warns us by example."

Christianity (the Bible) clearly defines marriage as being between A man and A woman.
mltoryblue





Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 109
Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everytone here seems to only be thinking about cvivil liberties and the charter, what about the children?

How does a kid with a mom and a dad who has 7 other wives grow up to be normal. Some of these kids in Bountiful have like 20-30 step siblings.

What about the gene pool as well? This all amounts to incest in the end. I think if scientists started studying the gene pools in these places they would discover some very disturbing things

The government doesn't allow you to marry your cousin, so why should polygamy be legal.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
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 vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Why is poligamy illegal?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB