Polygamy, right or wrong?

[_random_]

SALOMON WAS WISE. HE HAD SEVEN WIVES.

That must have been pretty early on. I believe his wives and concubines combined totaled to 1000. Because when you're already the richest and wisest guy on earth, boning 1000 chicks would probably seem like the only thing left on the old bucket list.

lecturing other people on bible interpretation is pretty rich, coming from a heretic.

True dat.

 

[Akka]

This is too far removed from my culture to be acceptable to me.

 

[classical_hero]

Can you elaborate? There were times in the OT where righteous men had multiple wives. That's a fact. I obviously don't support polygamy now, I just bring this up to the people who still cling to this ridiculous notion that the modern, western nuclear family is somehow biblical or historical.

Every single time polygamy was practised by people in the OT it always caused conflict and that was the cause of the downfall of Solomon, since he was dragged away from God by his multiple wives who kept their foreign customs. It caused conflict in the household of Abraham and the conflict got so bad that it forced the expulsion of Hagar. They were following the custom of the peoples around them and not what God wanted for them. Thy wee disobedient to God's clear command in Genesis f marriage simply being a union between one man and one woman, but according to the customs of the time that to show your power you had multiple wives and concubines. So by the results of their sinful actions we see the result of disobeying God's command for marriage. Since we have changed God's purpose for marriage and sex we are seeing the consequences of such actions in modern society.

Such as this. Bride Marries Herself. Should More Singles Throw Solo Weddings?
We have changed the definition far beyond what God intended and basically now marriage means whatever you want it to mean, making the institution worthless.

 

[Leonel]

Every single time polygamy was practised by people in the OT it always caused conflict and that was the cause of the downfall of Solomon, since he was dragged away from God by his multiple wives who kept their foreign customs. It caused conflict in the household of Abraham and the conflict got so bad that it forced the expulsion of Hagar. They were following the custom of the peoples around them and not what God wanted for them. Thy wee disobedient to God's clear command in Genesis f marriage simply being a union between one man and one woman, but according to the customs of the time that to show your power you had multiple wives and concubines. So by the results of their sinful actions we see the result of disobeying God's command for marriage. Since we have changed God's purpose for marriage and sex we are seeing the consequences of such actions in modern society.

Such as this. Bride Marries Herself. Should More Singles Throw Solo Weddings?
We have changed the definition far beyond what God intended and basically now marriage means whatever you want it to mean, making the institution worthless.

There are drive through wedding chapels in Las Vegas where you can be joined by bad Elvis impersonators 24/7 in the time it takes to reheat a Big Mac, some stale fries and pour a watered down soda. http://www.vivalasvegasweddings.com/elvis_wedding_packages.htm If the "institution" of marriage can survive that, it can survive a bride marrying herself or two men marrying each other.

 

[duckstab]

I have absolutely no moral objection to two or more consenting adults entering into a marriage.

The state should only have a voice in marriage to the extent to which it is a legally binding contract that confers certain secular rights and obligations. So it can insist, for example, that everyone involved be a mentally competent adult. But it shouldn't care whether it's 2 or 20 people who want to enter into that arrangement.

Religious institutions, on the other hand, shouldn't be expected to perform or recognize unions that are in violation of their beliefs.

 

[Hitti-Litti]

We have changed the definition far beyond what God intended and basically now marriage means whatever you want it to mean, making the institution worthless.

What about marriages between people who are for example Muslims or Hindus? Are their marriages just like God intended, even though they're not Christian or don't care about Christian traditions?

 

[civver_764]

End government support of marriage. Let people freely form their own consensual relationships. The simplest solution and the best one.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well, I actually agree with opponents of same-sex marriage that giving it legal recognition will lead to all sorts of other kinds of marriage getting legal recognition - or at least it should, unless its supporters are being hypocritical.

It depends upon the reasons they give for it to be allowed. One supposes there's an argument to behind that support for same-sex marriage. An argument which would mean support for some sorts, while not for other sort.

My own requirements are: consenting adults, no harm to others. This means that in theory I would be fine with a brother and sister marrying if they so wish, as long as they don't have children, or instead adopt them if they turn out to be suitable parents (unlikely <- prejudice, but hey). I would find it distasteful at best, but I feel likewise about Friends.

Marrying animals and under-age I would not support since they don't meet those requirements. The fallacy of the sliding slope is that you gradually accept stranger and stranger forms of marriage because one gets used to the stranger forms. But that disregards the fact that we have stricter rules than in the past for protecting people. Think of child labour and women's rights. They become stronger, not weaker. So the consenting adults, preventing harm rule may be sliding, but it's sliding in the right direction. Towards better protection and more equality.

I am confident enough in God's definition of marriage that I don't worry that the government's definition will ruin it.

Always good to see a man having faith in his faith

 

[civver_764]

Always good to see a man having faith in his faith

I'm not trying to be a dick but - why?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'm not trying to be a dick but - why?

People like that tend to not want to butt into other people's lives, pushing their own morals on them out of fear they'll be lost otherwise.

 

[gangleri2001]

Polygamy = You can still be monogamous if you want.

Monogamy = F**k you freedom.

Therefore polygamy is good.

 

[GenMarshall]

Polygamy, it should be banned.

 

[Hitti-Litti]

Polygamy = You can still be monogamous if you want.

Monogamy = F**k you freedom.

Therefore polygamy is good.

Pretty much this. You can still stick with just one wife even if polygamy is legalized, just like you don't have to become gay if gay marriages are legalized, or start doing drugs if drugs are decriminalized, or kill your unborn child if aborts are legal etcetc.

 

[ComradeDavo]

He has a book that says he can't do that. And he does everything the book says -- except for all that stuff it says that he doesn't do.

I'd like a real answer from classical_hero though. Why does polygamy have to be eitehr right or wrong?

Although I am also in disagreement with CH in regards to such restrictions on marriage, I doubt any of us truly "live and let live", we just vary to the degree to which we apply this.

Well obviously when things directly effect us the whoel 'live and let live' thign doesn't apply. But in terms of say 5 people having some marriage all together well as long as they all consent and they don't do anything to upset me (or calsssical_hero in this case) then why stop them? Why step into their lives and say 'no' when they aren't effecting any others? We are talking legality here of course. I mean i'd most likely strongly advise someone against entering a marriage with 4 other people, but i'm not gonna try and legally stop them. And that the crux of it really, advising against something or forceably stopping something.

 

[GhostWriter16]

What about marriages between people who are for example Muslims or Hindus? Are their marriages just like God intended, even though they're not Christian or don't care about Christian traditions?

Marriage, not being a sacrament (In Protestant tradition) is valid no matter who does it as long as it is an actual marriage. We believe God gave marriage to both the saved and the unsaved.

Pretty much this. You can still stick with just one wife even if polygamy is legalized, just like you don't have to become gay if gay marriages are legalized, or start doing drugs if drugs are decriminalized, or kill your unborn child if aborts are legal etcetc.

My that bolded part is revealing...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

My that bolded part is revealing...

Yep. And that unbolded part is what we in the trade call 'context'.

 

[GhostWriter16]

lecturing other people on bible interpretation is pretty rich, coming from a heretic.

Why is he a heretic?

 

[ComradeDavo]

polygamy, it should be banned.

But why????!!!!!

 

[classical_hero]

People like that tend to not want to butt into other people's lives, pushing their own morals on them out of fear they'll be lost otherwise.

The same could be said about those pushing for same sex marriage, since they are pushing their morals on us.

 

[classical_hero]

lecturing other people on bible interpretation is pretty rich, coming from a heretic.

Then so is Jesus, due what he teaches about marriage is basically what I am saying.