Why is polygamy such a hot-button topic?

[liz3564]

Lets remove the physical element for a moment...

It's difficult to make your point when you include the physical element, isn't it?

Let's face it...I know that physical intimacy does not make the whole of a marriage, but no one can deny that it is an important part of it. That's why divorces happen when spouses are caught cheating!

Before everyone comes down on me claiming that I'm fixated on sex, let me explain a little further..and I think most women will see where I am coming from. For me, and I think for most women, the sexual relationship is very emotional. In addition to creating children, it is also a further expression of love between husband and wife. It is very sacred, very personal, and I can only envision sharing that kind of intimacy with one person.

Bottom line, that is what makes accepting this principle so difficult. I can't imagine a loving Heavenly Father not understanding that.

[charity]

truth dancer, my husband has my permission to marry again, if I precede him. I don't know who she might be, but I know I will be all right with whoever he choses. After all, I know he can chose wisely because he chose me.

[Redeemed]

It is probably true that today most "polygamous" marriages are done without the first wife's consent. Because she died and then the widower married again.

a marriage covenant is broken in the event of a death of a spouse.

redeemed

[thesometimesaint]

Redeemed:

This hs already been dicussed. Like it or not the LDS are on firm Biblical grounds when it comes to polygamy.

[alannasaunt]

Romantic love follows friendship, trust, hard work and sacrifice... Not the other way around.

What makes romance or physical attraction so much more problematic to share than attention, time, work, and other types of intimacy?

I'm not saying it isn't problematic, I'm just saying why is it different than other types of intimacy, that we see as socially acceptable to share with those outside the marriage in appropriate balance and measure?

Friendship, trust, sacrifice...can be shared with many people in many different situations.

Romantic love - both emotional and physical - when accompanied by a marriage is different. It is the beginning to two people becoming one. Certainly, it must include those qualities you list, but there is so much more.

If romantic love was put on the same par as friendship, then why not just seal everybody to everybody in the CK. Of couse, this doesn't make sense. There would be no exclusivity. Fidelity would be a pointless concept. "Oneness" with a spouse would be a pointless concept.

[Redeemed]

Redeemed:

This hs already been dicussed. Like it or not the LDS are on firm Biblical grounds when it comes to polygamy.

When did God Command polygamy in the bible?

redeemed

[alannasaunt]

It is probably true that today most "polygamous" marriages are done without the first wife's consent.  Because she died and then the widower married again.

a marriage covenant is broken in the event of a death of a spouse.

redeemed

Not true of a temple marriage. Those vows are for time and all eternity.

[KevinG]

Romantic love follows friendship, trust, hard work and sacrifice...

[Zakuska]

liz,

Before everyone comes down on me claiming that I'm fixated on sex, let me explain a little further..and I think most women will see where I am coming from. For me, and I think for most women, the sexual relationship is very emotional. In addition to creating children, it is also a further expression of love between husband and wife. It is very sacred, very personal, and I can only envision sharing that kind of intimacy with one person.

But heres the problem... you are not sharing it with one person. You are also sharing it with God. Thus what did Mother Eve exclaim when her and Adam first had sexual intercourse?

Gen 4

1 AND Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Gods right there in the bed room with you liz .

[alannasaunt]

It is probably true that today most "polygamous" marriages are done without the first wife's consent.

[Zakuska]

Redeemed:

This hs already been dicussed. Like it or not the LDS are on firm Biblical grounds when it comes to polygamy.

When did God Command polygamy in the bible?

redeemed

When he commanded Barren Abraham and Sarah to procreate.

Why did Sarah give Hagar to Abraham for wife?

Because God commanded to Multiply and replenish the earth. And that is why Sarah did it.

[Redeemed]

It is probably true that today most "polygamous" marriages are done without the first wife's consent.

[Redeemed]

Redeemed:

This hs already been dicussed. Like it or not the LDS are on firm Biblical grounds when it comes to polygamy.

When did God Command polygamy in the bible?

redeemed

When he commanded Barren Abraham and Sarah to procreate.

Why did Sarah give Hagar to Abraham for wife?

Because God commanded to Multiply and replenish the earth. And that is why Sarah did it.

your reading alot into sarah's actions, God didn't command a polygamist marraige sarah just tried too fix things on her own.

redeemed

[KevinG]

Are you saying then, that if I marry and tell my husband that I don't want him to get sealed to another woman, that he must abide by that?

Accirding to our doctrines and the scriptures surrounding the new and everlasting covenant the wife must agree to an additional spouse. I cannot see where death would negate that wish.

ALthough I would be certain that it was God's will as well as my own, that my spouse did not remarry upon my death, before I demanded it of my spouse.

In my case I've told my wife that under no circumstance is she to deny herself the support of a good man just because I died before she did. I love her too much to see her lonley and struggling. If that means I need to share my time and emotions in the eternities, than I will learn to live with that very difficult prospect (which is the answer to the question would I accept this in reverse).

I hope my posts don't come off as pot shots. This is a very painful topic for me and I would love to be able to find some peace with it.

Nope, I can tell the difference between honest struggling with a concept and bashing me for my beliefs. You are in good form as far as I'm concerned.

[thesometimesaint]

Redeemed:

And they are not. They are earthly ceremonies that must be performed in Temples of God here on earth.

[Zakuska]

Reddemed,

Actually Christ taught the same thing in Matthew and Luke.

But the wording there does not mean we will not be married. Given in marriage and taking in marriage means that weddings will not be held because they will all have been taken care of in this life.

Christ taught in Matthew 12 the eternal Nature of Marriage. When God performed Adams and Eve's wedding Ceremony they where Immortal. So their wedding vows would last for eternity and no man can put that assunder.

[KevinG]

Redeemed,

Please take the discussion of "Is polygamy Biblical" to another thread. You are getting awfully close to " bible bashing" in a very sensitive topic.

Thank you.

[KevinG]

Pardon the interruption, but, I'd really like this to be considered, and I think it got lost in the fray...

"Now for the real question, how does "oneness" between three adults make more or less sense than "oneness" between two adults? WHile it would be more difficult to manage those relationships, how is it morally superior or inferior to the difficult work of managing becoming one with two people, if indeed they are all faithful to each other and their covenants? Especially if those covenants to care for and honor each other were mandated by God Himself?"

[alannasaunt]

Romantic love follows friendship, trust, hard work and sacrifice...

[Zakuska]

I agree completely Dad. I think this verse should be considered with what you have said.

1 Cor. 6: 17

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Does not Chirst pray that we will all be one as they are one?

Edit to post directly to aunt.

[Redeemed]

off-topic

deleted

[Dunamis]

Redeemed,

Please take the discussion of "Is polygamy Biblical" to another thread. You are getting awfully close to " bible bashing" in a very sensitive topic.

Thank you.

Redeemed, start your own thread. You are off-topic and your posts will be deleted if you don't get on topic.

[alannasaunt]

I agree completely Dad. I think this verse should be considered with what you have said.

1 Cor. 6: 17

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Does not Chirst pray that we will all be one as they are one?

aunt,

The reason I say fidelity would be a pointless concept is because once my husband starts to share himself with another the way he would share himself with me, then our relationship is no longer unique. It doesn't matter how many wives we're talking about here...2 or 20 or 200. He is no longer "mine". This means I could no longer be "his". I see being married as being something to someone that no one else can or should be...unique. Once he enters a romantic relationship with someone else, the effect for the first wife would be the same whether he was married to the other woman or not. The first wife's role has been diminished. The fact that her role is no longer unique diminishes her as a wife.

So by God the father being my God and at the same time he is your God some how diminishes his uniqueness and so he no longer can be my God?

My/our relationship with God is not romantic. We have a parent/child relationship.

I made the point earlier about the differences.

[KevinG]

This is probably the point at which our understanding diverges. I see what you are saying, but without having to actually be called to and live plural marriage, I cannot say for certain that two halves of a whole, are any less moral or right in the eyes of God than three thirds of a whole, especially when God commands it.

Similarly, I have found that the love between seven children did not divide the love between the first two, but multiplied that love. (Apples and oranges in a sense, but similar in that it is a more complex and different relationship as people are added to a family, regardless of that relationship being romantic or brotherly).

My oldest was very excited about having our third child, because he was under the impression we were going to trade in his rather noisy baby sister on a better model. We didn't know this until a few days before the third childs birth, and he asked a few clarifying questions. He eventually came to grips with the fact that he was now going to share us with two noisy baby sisters, but it wasn't easy (and still seems to cause him some heartburn from time to time even as a Teen). Strangely enough the other four siblings were easier for him to welcome into the world.

Regarding romantic vs. godly love... As I get older, (and perhaps this is due to my body breaking down as opposed to my spirit growing ) I have come to value and cherish the friendship and respect part of my marital relationship as much as the romatic part, if not more. The kind of intimacy I value the most from my wife is in her role as a prophetess, counselor and companion- and serving her is in ways synonymous with loving her and vice versa. The same kinds of things I value highly in my relationship with God.

However, when it comes to physical and romantic intimacy I do understand where you are coming from, and that is admittedly the most complex and problematic facet of understanding the Principle.

Plato would have argued that brotherly love is a higher form than romantic love, but he was probably a tired middle aged man when he said that too.

[Zakuska]

alannasaunt,

The reason I say fidelity would be a pointless concept is because once my husband starts to share himself with another the way he would share himself with me, then our relationship is no longer unique. It doesn't matter how many wives we're talking about here...2 or 20 or 200. He is no longer "mine". This means I could no longer be "his". I see being married as being something to someone that no one else can or should be...unique. Once he enters a romantic relationship with someone else, the effect for the first wife would be the same whether he was married to the other woman or not. The first wife's role has been diminished. The fact that her role is no longer unique diminishes her as a wife.

So by God the father being my God and at the same time he is your God some how diminishes his uniqueness and so he no longer can be my God?

Actually... I'd see her role as increasing in some ways because now she has to juggle another family into the mix.

Moved here to split posts: Sorry for the confusion.