Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Cooperation in Polygynous Households


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes it is in the furnace of afflictions that people most grow (or break). I do not think anyone would deny that polygamy is much more difficult to live righteously then monogamy but that is true of a lot of life. Sometimes the hard road is the best road.

Which is why everyone should live every day blind drunk. Sure, it's hard to behave responsibly like that, but sometimes the hard road is the best road.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Gray said:

Which is why everyone should live every day blind drunk. Sure, it's hard to behave responsibly like that, but sometimes the hard road is the best road.

What's so hard about living blind drunk?? I have been acquainted with quite a few who happily lived life in a mostly alcoholic daze. My oldest brother was one. I am sue you can come up with a better analogy such as a priest or nun with vows of celibacy.

Glenn

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Gray said:

Which is why everyone should live every day blind drunk. Sure, it's hard to behave responsibly like that, but sometimes the hard road is the best road.

You think people live blind drunk everyday because they see it as the "hard' road?  Seriously?  Numbing out and avoiding life is the easy road.  People get wasted to avoid pain and difficulty in life. 

Are you suggesting that there cannot be merit in struggle and the "hard road"?  We should always choose the "easy road"? 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Gray said:

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/app.20170438

For your consideration. Another fruit with which we can evaluate the moral value of polygamy.

I don't think that one can rate the moral value of it like that.

It would be a bloody hard thing to do well, though.  Like unicycle vs bicycle.

What if one were a Christian in a Muslim country like Pakistan?  One must walk very very carefully because just being a Christian there is very dangerous.  Would not one be tempted to say that the fruit of being a Christian in that case is potentially very bitter?  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes it is in the furnace of afflictions that people most grow (or break). I do not think anyone would deny that polygamy is much more difficult to live righteously then monogamy but that is true of a lot of life. Sometimes the hard road is the best road.

Especially if you are a woman who takes the brunt of it, we are the most in need of growth! 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes it is in the furnace of afflictions that people most grow (or break). I do not think anyone would deny that polygamy is much more difficult to live righteously then monogamy but that is true of a lot of life. Sometimes the hard road is the best road.

So are you going on the record that polygamy is the "best road"?

1 hour ago, Gray said:

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/app.20170438

For your consideration. Another fruit with which we can evaluate the moral value of polygamy.

Thanks, Gray.

Once again, polygamy for the fail.

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

What's so hard about living blind drunk?? I have been acquainted with quite a few who happily lived life in a mostly alcoholic daze. My oldest brother was one. I am sue you can come up with a better analogy such as a priest or nun with vows of celibacy.

Glenn

Polygamy is kind of the opposite of celibacy, just as drunkenness is the opposite of sobriety.

Drunkenness is "hard" in the sense that it's hard to behave yourself when drunk. I was just following the Nehor's argument and applying it to a different topic.

Edited by Gray
Link to comment
55 minutes ago, pogi said:

You think people live blind drunk everyday because they see it as the "hard' road?  Seriously?  Numbing out and avoiding life is the easy road.  People get wasted to avoid pain and difficulty in life. 

Are you suggesting that there cannot be merit in struggle and the "hard road"?  We should always choose the "easy road"? 

You missed to context - the argument was in response to the Nehor's argument, which used the same reasoning.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes it is in the furnace of afflictions that people most grow (or break). I do not think anyone would deny that polygamy is much more difficult to live righteously then monogamy but that is true of a lot of life. Sometimes the hard road is the best road.

Wow.  I actually agree with this.

It's not exactly a secret that the "new and everlasting covenant" is "an offering ... appointed"  by G-d.  The blessings come hereafter.

 

 

Quote

 

6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

8 Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.

Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?

10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?

11 And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father ordained unto you, before the world was?

12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.

 

 

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

I don't think that one can rate the moral value of it like that.

It would be a bloody hard thing to do well, though.  Like unicycle vs bicycle.

What if one were a Christian in a Muslim country like Pakistan?  One must walk very very carefully because just being a Christian there is very dangerous.  Would not one be tempted to say that the fruit of being a Christian in that case is potentially very bitter?  

Jesus said we should judge these things by their fruits. Ever the pragmatist.

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, pogi said:

You can in no way extrapolate these results and apply them to wealthy American polygamous families who come from different cultures, different religions, different socioeconomic status, etc.

Why not? Were all polygamous families wealthy? Some were, but not all.

Edited by Gray
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Gray said:

Why not? Were all polygamous families wealthy? Some were, but not all.

Wealth isn't the only factor.  You also have to account for culture, religion, cultural views of money and money management, social practices and attitudes, the roles of men/women and husbands/wives in those cultures, etc.  I am sure that polygamy in a poor, Nigerian, Muslim family is lived very differently than we see on the show "Sister Wives" for example.  

This is true with any study, you can't extrapolate results from one culture and expect it to apply to all. 

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, juliann said:

Of course not. Women can always be controlled somehow. It's a little harder now that we have legal and social rights, though. 

I don't know what you mean.  The study is not about controlling women. 

I am curious at your position with Joseph Smith instigating polygamy though.  Do you believe he did so to control women?  If so, do you view him as a fallen prophet who committed adultery to keep women under his thumb?

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, pogi said:

Wealth isn't the only factor.  You also have to account for culture, religion, cultural views of money and money management, social practices and attitudes, the roles of men/women and husbands/wives in those cultures, etc.  I am sure that polygamy in a poor, Nigerian, Muslim family is lived very differently than we see on the show "Sister Wives" for example.  

This is true with any study, you can't extrapolate results from one culture and expect it to apply to all. 

This would only be on a Mormon board if the comparison was to Mormon polygamy. And it just might be that modern Nigerian women can be compared to 19 c women. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't know what you mean.  The study is not about controlling women. 

I am curious at your position with Joseph Smith instigating polygamy though.  Do you believe he did so to control women?  If so, do you view him as a fallen prophet who committed adultery to keep women under his thumb?

This thread is about this study. No red herrings. And if you think women weren't controlled in the 19c century, well, I don't know what to tell you.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, juliann said:

This would only be on a Mormon board if the comparison was to Mormon polygamy. And it just might be that modern Nigerian women can be compared to 19 c women. 

I would agree with this:  I think you have to assume near equivalency unless there is a solid reason not to.  I don't see one.  Folks is folks.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, juliann said:

This would only be on a Mormon board if the comparison was to Mormon polygamy.

I understand he is trying to compare it to Mormon polygamy, but that doesn't mean there is any merit in the comparison.  I am pretty sure any anthropologist would see the limits in the comparison and would be careful to only apply the results to the target group studied.  Any other extrapolation is is careless. 

5 minutes ago, juliann said:

And it just might be that modern Nigerian women can be compared to 19 c women. 

I think the cultures are/were vastly different. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, juliann said:

This thread is about this study. No red herrings. And if you think women weren't controlled in the 19c century, well, I don't know what to tell you.

I agree.  I wasn't the one who brought up the issue controlling women.  I was addressing your comment and simply am curious as to how you approach Joseph Smith. 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...