Polygamy

[Calm]

I don't think they would (or do) behave properly on average. Human beings are prone to human emotions, such as jealousy and power seeking.

The people prone to this are going to have this in any relationship....

[T'pau]

The people prone to this are going to have this in any relationship....

and doubley, tripley or quadrupely in polygamous ones.

[Calm]

and doubley, tripley or quadrupely in polygamous ones.

CFR

[Bee Eff]

I don't think they would (or do) behave properly on average. Human beings are prone to human emotions, such as jealousy and power seeking.

This would lead to a society that is much more depraved than we have imo. On average people behave properly.

and doubley, tripley or quadrupely in polygamous ones.

lol, so the more people you come into contact with the increased probability of improper behavior? This implies we should be a hermit society. Oh wait, those that live alone have a tendency of being depraved.

[T'pau]

CFR

This was an opinion. Just like the one I was responding to.

This would lead to a society that is much more depraved than we have imo. On average people behave properly.

lol, so the more people you come into contact with the increased probability of improper behavior? This implies we should be a hermit society. Oh wait, those that live alone have a tendency of being depraved.

I think we have a pretty depraved society already.

[Ron Beron]

He is speaking of LDS practicing Polygamy. Not in reference to the general concept of polygamy.

I cannot see how you can deduce that from the following,

"...the Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction in any way, shape or form the contracting of so-called "plural marriages,"

I think he is quite clear in the need for members of the church to keep completely clear from the practice or even the countenancing, i.e., the passive acceptance of the practice. In addition, the OD states, "I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

[Ron Beron]

'Bee Eff' writes,

He is speaking of LDS practicing Polygamy. Not in reference to the general concept of polygamy.

[Ron Beron]

I say it's the MEN who have the problem....they want 'young chicks', not mature women their own age....and they seem to still want that 'trophy' on thier arm...it seems the older they get, the more picky they are about 'looks'....I can speak from experiance as I have actively lived in the Utah LDS single scene since my 20's...I've seen it all, heard it all, been there, done that and bought the T-shirt...lol

FYI, I have a trophy wife and she is, indeed a prize for a 50 year old young chick.

[Ron Beron]

I do not believe marriage is a contract with society.

Please elaborate on what rights you feel society has the right to bestow. I feel that the recognition is due to the married couple as a matter of fact, not as a gift given.

I agree with NoFear. Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, their families and society at large.

Marriage benefits society apart from religious concern or duty to include procreation, paternity, child and spousal support, survivor's rights, and stability. Society in turn returns the covenant by maintaining a structure that encourages those parts of society. Not only is a marriage union convenantal but symbiotic.

[Bee Eff]

I cannot see how you can deduce that from the following,

"...the Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction in any way, shape or form the contracting of so-called "plural marriages,"

I think he is quite clear in the need for members of the church to keep completely clear from the practice or even the countenancing, i.e., the passive acceptance of the practice. In addition, the OD states, "I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

Keep the entire sentence together please:

the Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction in any way, shape or form the contracting of so-called "plural marriages," but that on the contrary it absolutely forbids the members of the Church from entering into any such unlawful relations or teaching or encouraging such practices, and that it will continue in the future as it has done in the past to deal with and punish to the extent of its authority any persons who violate these injunctions.

You can believe what you want, but he states the following in this order:

1. The Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction the contracting of so-called "plural marriages" in the Church
   
2. Contrary to the belief that the Church does so, the Church absolutely forbids the members of the Church from entering into any such unlawful relations or teaching or encouraging such in the Church
   

He is speaking of the practice of polygamy in the Church. He is not speaking to anything else. The second portion of the sentence clarifies of whom he is speaking.

[Ron Beron]

'Bernard Gui' writes,

I'm trying to understand your position better. You said that polygamy is a sexual dysfunction:

I should have been more careful with my words. I should have said that it is a societal dysfunction not sexual although there is something bizarre for having multiple partners within a marriage.

I asked if you thought having multiple unmarried partners was dysfunctional and you replied

it depends on the circumstances. I asked if the same statement can be made about polygamy.

Can it be functional depending on the circumstances? If not, why?

I think there might be a time when there is a dearth of viable partners that polygamy might be necessary. This is certainly not anymore true today than it was 150 years ago.

The only difference I see between polygamy and having multiple unmarried parters is the

vow of matrimony. Polygamists may tend to be more responsible for the care of progeny than those who

do not marry their partners. Promiscuity exposes participants to great risk for std's, while polygamy does not. Children of polygamists are more likely to have the influence of both parents and a closer

family system than promiscuous couples.

On this I would probably agree although both are immoral in the eyes of the church.

I see no reason to make polygamy illegal when indiscriminate sex and serial divorce are not.

I do not understand why polygamists are a pariah while our culture condones and even celebrates

and promotes promiscuity.

With respect I cannot see the logic. Promiscuous sex outside marriage is as dangerous to society as polygamy can be. It would be akin to saying that alcohol is more acceptable than heroin. Where does society promote promiscuity?

[Ron Beron]

Keep the entire sentence together please:

You can believe what you want, but he states the following in this order:

1. The Church does not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate or sanction the contracting of so-called "plural marriages" in the Church
   
2. Contrary to the belief that the Church does so, the Church absolutely forbids the members of the Church from entering into any such unlawful relations or teaching or encouraging such in the Church
   

He is speaking of the practice of polygamy in the Church. He is not speaking to anything else. The second portion of the sentence clarifies of whom he is speaking.

Actually the latter of the two sentences supports my assertion in that the church forbids teaching or encouraging the practice among members. Are we talking in general terms or how polygamy is responded to in the church? In short, we do not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate, sanction, encourage or teach the contracting of plural marriage in the church. What others do with their desires is up to them.

[alter idem]

Actually the latter of the two sentences supports my assertion in that the church forbids teaching or encouraging the practice among members. Are we talking in general terms or how polygamy is responded to in the church? In short, we do not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate, sanction, encourage or teach the contracting of plural marriage in the church. What others do with their desires is up to them.

Yes, and the church has taken a firm stand against introducing polygamy again into the church. Polygamists in countries like Africa where it is legal and acceptable, are not allowed to be baptized.

[Bee Eff]

Actually the latter of the two sentences supports my assertion in that the church forbids teaching or encouraging the practice among members. Are we talking in general terms or how polygamy is responded to in the church? In short, we do not countenance, aid, abet, tolerate, sanction, encourage or teach the contracting of plural marriage in the church. What others do with their desires is up to them.

It is a single sentence.

We are speaking in general terms in this thread. Did you not follow my responses to all statements as to beliefs of biblical support or lack thereof for polygamy? We are speaking as to the rationale used to justify a position against the practicing polygamy in general in relation to everyone everywhere that may desire to do so.

Articles of Faith 11

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

LDS believe that anyone may practice polygamy according to the dictates of their own conscience. They simply cannot be LDS and do such. I am in no way encouraging LDS to practice polygamy. I do however believe that the practice should be allowed by anyone who does not believe that polygamy should not be practiced should they choose to do so.

[Ihearya]

LDS believe that anyone may practice polygamy according to the dictates of their own conscience. They simply cannot be LDS and do such. I am in no way encouraging LDS to practice polygamy. I do however believe that the practice should be allowed by anyone who does not believe that polygamy should not be practiced should they choose to do so.

I agree.

[Ron Beron]

LDS believe that anyone may practice polygamy according to the dictates of their own conscience. They simply cannot be LDS and do such. I am in no way encouraging LDS to practice polygamy. I do however believe that the practice should be allowed by anyone who does not believe that polygamy should not be practiced should they choose to do so.

Why encourage something that has caused so much pain for so many people? If it isn't for the LDS why should it be for anyone else? There is a reason for its illegality of which I posted quite awhile back.

[Yirgacheffe]

God started the world with one man and one woman....a husband and a wife.

He has maintained that ratio even until now.

Except within the LDS Church...

Except in China and India...

Well from China and India we hear of selective abortion and infanticide of female babies so that would explain their skewed ratio. But since LDS DON'T practice either of those I don't understand the following?

My comment was that that most certainly is not the case within the Church, where there is a massive shortage of men.

I'm not suggesting that we should bring back polygamy in the Church; I'm only pointing out that the sort of gender imbalance that you contend doesn't happen in practice, is in fact a major problem right here within the Church.

Since LDS birth ratios are within the norm (not murderously distorted) why is there "a massive shortage of men"???

[Calm]

Since LDS birth ratios are within the norm (not murderously distorted) why is there "a massive shortage of men"???

He probably means "active" or "faithful" men. If one attends Sunday meetings, you'll see a higher number of single women to men in most wards, especially as they get older.

Historically speaking most churches find that women tend to participate more in religious activities than men, especially unmarried women. Participation to the best of one's ability is an important factor in temple worthiness at this time.

So if a woman wants a temple marriage, there are less options available than there are for a man usually.

[Bee Eff]

Why encourage something that has caused so much pain for so many people? If it isn't for the LDS why should it be for anyone else? There is a reason for its illegality of which I posted quite awhile back.

We, LDS, believe that there is nothing wrong with polygamy aside from the fact that our peers in society will not allow it, and have made it against the Law.

Polygamy does not inherently result in "pain for ... people." Give up the argument that this is the case, it cannot be shown to be any more true than the idea that monogamy inherently results in "pain for ... people."

[Bee Eff]

Well from China and India we hear of selective abortion and infanticide of female babies so that would explain their skewed ratio. But since LDS DON'T practice either of those I don't understand the following?

Since LDS birth ratios are within the norm (not murderously distorted) why is there "a massive shortage of men"???

I doubt there is or ever has been a shortage of men. Such is most likely an attempt at justification where justification is unnecessary. If there were a shortage at some point it is probably incidental and not causal to the practice of polygamy.

[Neighbor]

As I have stated often throughout this thread, what of those that are not believers in the Bible? There is no religious reason for them to not practice such. Do you believe that they should be held to a religious directive that they do not believe in?

Also, and again, I won't argue the Biblical stance on polygamy. That is irrelevant to the thread.

I addressed the opening statement, which was generic, not strictly secular. Now you bring in secular and void what I said about the teachings and commandments in the Bible?:-)

Have at it dude:-) Sorry to bug you with the facts.

[Calm]

We, LDS, believe that there is nothing wrong with polygamy aside from the fact that our peers in society will not allow it, and have made it against the Law.

Polygamy does not inherently result in "pain for ... people." Give up the argument that this is the case, it cannot be shown to be any more true than the idea that monogamy inherently results in "pain for ... people."

I can think of at least one case where its absence would have been a hardship and that is in my own great great maybe great grandfather's family where the second wife (who was chosen by the first wife IIRC) lost her first and only child in childbirth and was rendered an invalid for the rest of her life at the same time. She was lovingly cared for by all members of the family, surrounded by not only her husband but children who loved her dearly and a sisterwife who cared for her physical needs with no complaint I've ever been able to find. The family bond was there so there was no sense this was some charity case or some poor relative living on the bounty of others.

A monogamous marriage would probably have left that woman without the experience of being if not a mother, at least very close to one and experiencing the love of children all day every day of her life. There is also a good chance that the woman would have been left on her own at times when her husband had to work for a living. And considering the importance of children in most family relationships, the fact that there were children present in the family avoided possible resentments arising in her relationship with her husband over this and hopefully it softened her own disappointment, if there was any.

[Yirgacheffe]

He probably means "active" or "faithful" men. If one attends Sunday meetings, you'll see a higher number of single women to men in most wards, especially as they get older.

Historically speaking most churches find that women tend to participate more in religious activities than men, especially unmarried women. Participation to the best of one's ability is an important factor in temple worthiness at this time.

So if a woman wants a temple marriage, there are less options available than there are for a man usually.

But don't young men straighten themselves up a bit if they want to settle down? Is there no way for young men to "make amends"? I just can't see this as a "massive" problem as has been asserted?????

[Calm]

I just can't see this as a "massive" problem as has been asserted?????

Perhaps if one is married, it's a problem but not a massive one, but for someone single....?

[Ron Beron]

We, LDS, believe that there is nothing wrong with polygamy aside from the fact that our peers in society will not allow it, and have made it against the Law.

Polygamy does not inherently result in "pain for ... people." Give up the argument that this is the case, it cannot be shown to be any more true than the idea that monogamy inherently results in "pain for ... people."

Nonsense! There is plenty wrong about polygamy. If you don't believe me mention it the next time you're up for a temple recommend.

And why should I give up an argument I believe in?