Polygamy

[Bee Eff]

Polygamy does not equate to underage marriage.

Polygamy does not equate to a sexual deviation.

Polygamy does not equate to forced marriage.

Now, the practices of the FLDS appear equate to all of the above, but the practice of polygamy is merely incidental.

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

or rather, since it seems many missed the point of the question:

Is there a rational position for being against the practice of polygamy?

[Namaste]

Polygamy does not equate to underage marriage.

Polygamy does not equate to a sexual deviation.

Polygamy does not equate to forced marriage.

Now, the practices of the FLDS appear equate to all of the above, but the practice of polygamy is merely incidental.

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

It's illegal.

[Flyonthewall]

Polygamy does not equate to underage marriage.

Polygamy does not equate to a sexual deviation.

Polygamy does not equate to forced marriage.

Now, the practices of the FLDS appear equate to all of the above, but the practice of polygamy is merely incidental.

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

To be honest, I would rather see voluntary polygamy rather than men going out and fathering children by 5 different women(or just more than one), and then not taking care of them. Of course, this would mean the father/husband would need to be able to take care of his kids and wives sufficientlly so they would not be reliant on welfare. (don't know how this would be enforced, but hope you understand what I mean.)

[LeSellers]

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

It's illegal.

But it is not ipso facto immoral.

There is nothing in the Bible that denounces polygyny,

It's odd, but the only book of scripture that does condemn plural marriage is the Book of Mormon, and it does so only for a particular people and for a particular time, and distinctly allows plural marriages when the Lord commands it.

If a married couple determines they want to include a second wife, what is inherently wrong with that?

Disclaimer, I am not advocating polygyny, nor have I ever. S'ara insulted me on a different topic asking me if I were a polygynist. I am not. I know (via the 'net) a man who probably is. He makes a very compelling case for the practice that works in favor of his (presumed) wives.

I have read several of the "Christian Polygyny" sites, including a lengthy, on-line book on the subject, that make a powerful case that monogyny is actually contrary to God's plan for all but "Bishops", and "Deacons".

Since we LDSs have OD1, this does not affect us. But the rest of the Christian world should at least take an open-minded look at the subject.

Lehi

[Bee Eff]

It's illegal.

Why is it illegal?

[Namaste]

It's illegal.But it is not ipso facto immoral.

There is nothing in the Bible that denounces polygyny,

It's odd, but the only book of scripture that does condemn plural marriage is the Book of Mormon, and it does so only for a particular people and for a particular time, and distinctly allows plural marriages when the Lord commands it.

If a married couple determines they want to include a second wife, what is inherently wrong with that?

Disclaimer, I am not advocating polygyny, nor have I ever. S'ara insulted me on a different topic asking me if I were a polygynist. I am not. I know (via the 'net) a man who probably is. He makes a very compelling case for the practice that works in favor of his (presumed) wives.

I have read several of the "Christian Polygyny" sites, including a lengthy, on-line book on the subject, that make a powerful case that monogyny is actually contrary to God's plan for all but "Bishops", and "Deacons".

Since we LDSs have OD1, this does not affect us. But the rest of the Christian world should at least take an open-minded look at the subject.

Lehi

What is OD1?

Why would it be an insult to ask you if you were a polygynist?

Why is it illegal?

I don't know.

[ebeddoulos]

Now, the practices of the FLDS appear equate to all of the above, but the practice of polygamy is merely incidental.

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

1. More than one mother-in-law

2. More than one honey-do list

3. More than one time-of-the-month per month

I'm sure there are more

[Bee Eff]

I don't know.

Then that is not an honest rational position against practice of polygamy.

[Glenn101]

The problem that I can see is that I do not know of a study of polygamy that can do it justice. It needs to be done in an open society where the women are free to choose polygamy or reject it. And to be able to discuss it openly. It is too emotional a subject for people to react to rationally and logically.

There have always been problems in polyamous societies. Remember the jealously and rivalry between Rachel and Leah over Jacob?

Most LDS women are not cut out for polyamy. They have been raised in a monagamous society and would do very poorly in a polygamous setting. However there are some that seem to like it. I have seen some documentaries on individual polygamous households where the women were there by choice, not coercion and they all worked together as a family. I expect there were some problems that were not discussed tough, but I have no way of knowing.

I think that allowing polygamy where the man is married to multiple women and responsibly supports them and the children produced makes more sense than allowing men to have children by multiple women and the taxpayers wind up footing the bill.

Glenn

[Bee Eff]

1. More than one mother-in-law

2. More than one honey-do list

3. More than one time-of-the-month per month

I'm sure there are more

I agree with this list as a rationale for not practicing polygamy, but not as rationale for being against polygamy...

[johnny]

Bee Eff,

Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?

Below is the Catholic position on polygamy:

2387 - Polygamy is not in accord with the moral law. [Conjugal] communion is radically contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God which was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

2400 - Adultery, divorce, polygamy, and free union are grave offenses against the dignity of marriage

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

1645 - The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity which must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection. Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a7.htm#V

[LeSellers]

What is OD1?

Official Declaration 1. It's in the Doctrine and Covenants, part of our canon.

It seems a bit odd that you'd participate in this LDS discussion forum without even knowing the basics of our faith. You're welcome to do so, of course, but the lack of foundation does seem strange.

Why would it be an insult to ask you if you were a polygynist?

It was the context. Her "question" was more in the mode of an accusation. Just another example of people jumping to conclusions based on the vigorous defense of constitutional rights.

Lehi

[Namaste]

Then that is not an honest rational position against practice of polygamy.

It is a fact that it's illegal. The fact that I don't know why doesn't negate it as a reason for not practicing it.

[Bee Eff]

The problem that I can see is that I do not know of a study of polygamy that can do it justice. It needs to be done in an open society where the women are free to choose polygamy or reject it. And to be able to discuss it openly. It is too emotional a subject for people to react to rationally and logically.

There have always been problems in polyamous societies. Remember the jealously and rivalry between Rachel and Leah over Jacob?

Most LDS women are not cut out for polyamy. They have been raised in a monagamous society and would do very poorly in a polygamous setting. However there are some that seem to like it. I have seen some documentaries on individual polygamous households where the women were there by choice, not coercion and they all worked together as a family. I expect there were some problems that were not discussed tough, but I have no way of knowing.

I think that allowing polygamy where the man is married to multiple women and responsibly supports them and the children produced makes more sense than allowing men to have children by multiple women and the taxpayers wind up footing the bill.

Glenn

These issues seem to only be an issue if the polygamous marriage is forced following dissatisfaction. If divorce is an option, then how does dissatisfaction impact the practice? Remember that we are not discussing forced marriage but consenting marriage.

[LeSellers]

Below is the Catholic position on polygamy:

The Catholic position, like any religious position on plural marriage, is not based on reason, or not on reason alone.

BF's question was about rationality. Thus, your message is off topic.

Lehi

[ebeddoulos]

I agree with this list as a rationale for not practicing polygamy, but not as rationale for being against polygamy...

Typical.

Changing the parameters from "Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?" to "Is there a rational position for being against the practice of polygamy?", are you?

[Bee Eff]

It is a fact that it's illegal. The fact that I don't know why doesn't negate it as a reason for not practicing it.

The question is to a position against the practice, not whether the practice is or is not illegal. There is practiced polygamy in the United Arab Emirrates legally, are you for or against this practice in the UAE? If against, by what rationale?

Typical.

Changing the parameters from "Is there a rational position against the practice of polygamy?" to "Is there a rational position for being against the practice of polygamy?", are you?

I suppose my initial statement was in error. Correcting

[Namaste]

Official Declaration 1. It's in the Doctrine and Covenants, part of our canon.

It seems a bit odd that you'd participate in this LDS discussion forum without even knowing the basics of our faith. You're welcome to do so, of course, but the lack of foundation does seem strange.

Lehi

On the contrary, I just hadn't heard that nickname for it. I was BIC, raised in the church, served a mission and all the other callings you can have in a ward. I think that qualifies me.

[Bee Eff]

Bee Eff,

Below is the Catholic position on polygamy:

2387 - Polygamy is not in accord with the moral law. [Conjugal] communion is radically contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God which was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

2400 - Adultery, divorce, polygamy, and free union are grave offenses against the dignity of marriage

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

1645 - The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity which must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection. Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a7.htm#V

So, your rationale for being against the practice of polygamy is that it does not show respect for the spouse?

The Catholic position is not rationale, it is a position.

This position calls into question the state of all polygamous individuals in the Bible. What of Abraham, Moses, Israel, etc.? They spoke with God and did not feel that polygamy was a "grave offense against the dignity of marriage", "Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive" or that "polygamy... in fact, directly negates the plan of God." How is such rationally reconciled?

[Namaste]

The question is to a position against the practice, not whether the practice is or is not illegal. There is practiced polygamy in the United Arab Emirrates legally, are you for or against this practice in the UAE? If against, by what rationale?

One of the reasons the church has stated for not practicing it, is that it's against the law in this country. That would be one of my biggest oppositions to the practice as well.

Normally, I don't care what two consenting adults do together. But from what we've seen over the many years of its practice since 1835, the effect on the children, and a lot of the wives as well, has been devastating. That is the other reason I would oppose it.

[johnny]

LeSellers,

The Catholic position, like any religious position on plural marriage, is not based on reason, or not on reason alone.

The Catholic position is based on the New Covenant position which is:

- Ephesians 5:31-33 (a man leave, shall be joined unto his wife, and two shall be one flesh)

- 1Corinthians 7:2 (avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband)

[SolarPowered]

But from what we've seen over the many years of its practice since 1835, the effect on the children, and a lot of the wives as well, has been devastating.

What have "we" "seen", exactly?

[Bee Eff]

One of the reasons the church has stated for not practicing it, is that it's against the law in this country. That would be one of my biggest oppositions to the practice as well.

That is why the Church does not practice it, the Church is not against the practice of polygamy.

Normally, I don't care what two consenting adults do together. But from what we've seen over the many years of its practice since 1835, the effect on the children, and a lot of the wives as well, has been devastating. That is the other reason I would oppose it.

If I were to follow the same logic I would be against monogamous marriage as well. Monogamy frequently does not result in the greatest of child rearing environments.

I doubt that the devastating effects are due to polygamy. I believe these effects are due to underage marriage, forced marriage, sexual deviation, irresponsible reproduction in the face of insufficient funding, and possibly other variables that also impact monogamous marriages and the children therein. If an example exists please cite such of devastating effects that does not also contain an example of these.

[LeSellers]

On the contrary, I just hadn't heard that nickname for it. I was BIC, raised in the church, served a mission and all the other callings you can have in a ward. I think that qualifies me.

Maybe not.

It's been "Official Declaration 1" since the early 80s, and "OD1" is the usual abbreviation. Prior to the current edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, it was simply the "Official Declaration", and has been since the 1908 edition. It is so titled in the 1960s edition that I bought before my mission in 1967.

Lehi

[Bee Eff]

LeSellers,

The Catholic position is based on the New Covenant position which is:

- Ephesians 5:31-33 (a man leave, shall be joined unto his wife, and two shall be one flesh)

- 1Corinthians 7:2 (avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband)

This is an acceptable position against polygamy being practiced by adherents to the Catholic faith, I concede that.

But what of adherents of other faiths? Do they have no right to personal decision? This rationale is still weak when regarding those that are not Catholic.

Also, I am not LeSellers