Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

BCSpace

Recommended Posts

TTBOMK? <_<

Germany's sex ratio was unbalanced due to war; China's is unbalanced due to policy. Similar outcome; different cause. Except that the ratios are opposite.

To The Best Of My Knowledge

I hadn't heard that it was terribly out of balance in Germany after WW2. Bombs really don't discriminate on the basis of sex. I do know that for several years women far out numbered men in Paraguay due to all their wars. As that has now been many decades past I would imagine that that is no longer the case.

Link to comment

To The Best Of My Knowledge

I hadn't heard that it was terribly out of balance in Germany after WW2. Bombs really don't discriminate on the basis of sex.

Being at the front lines does though. In Bavaria, there were .6 million soldiers removed from the marriage market in a former population of 7 million.

According to this site, the ratio of men to women when from slightly over one to one to about 2/3 to 1 for the age of 20 and then slowly increasing up to the age of 75 where men were about 80% women in numbers (that is if I read the graphs right, too lazy to try and find the actual data). https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=FEMES11&paper_id=172

Link to comment
  • 4 months later...
My libertarian nature tells me that the government should respond to what people want, rather than mandating what people can get.

Sure, as long as government doesn't benefit more than the ideal. Hence gays should (and can in any state right now) marry all they want. Just don't give it legal status.

Link to comment

Here is thought.....

Let's say that ssm is the slippery slope.to.polygamy, whats to say such is not Gods plan inorder to re-re-institute polygamy?

Not that God wanted ssm, but that in His forknowledge, He would use the legalization of ssm best in His favor for the benefit of the Saints; the Saints stopped polygamy because of gov persecution, so riding the coat tails of ssm would provide a legal basis in favor of polygamy.

Anything is possible. But I wouldn't hold my breath.

Link to comment

My wife is more in favor of it than I am.

My wife said I could have another wife if she can have another husband.

Needless to say I have no desire to. Being married to one woman is tough enough. The early Saints were either commanded by God to marry more than one woman or totally insane. I dont see a rational man adopting it. Though I would much rather see a man with many wives taking care of his children then a man sleeping around with multiple women and leaving his partners and children high and dry.

Regardless, Im not super concerned about it.

Link to comment

For purposes of expanding my knowledge base, could you provide reference to the institute manual that debunks the 7 woman shall cleave unto one man, I have never read anything on that verse other than what is in the BOM.

I have. In Isaiah. Which i think is quoted in the BoM.

If plural spouse were legal in the US, I agree it could not be limited to men having harems.

No doubt.

However, the history of polygamy in the Church shows that it was limited to selected men having more than one wife with whom carnal relations were permitted.
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
I'd still recognize the ideal marriage. The government of society has a responsibility to maintain and incentivize what's best for society.

There is no such thing as an "ideal marriage". Just ones that are more successful than others.

That is open to discussion.

In this context, the ideal is that which is defined by LDS doctrine.

Link to comment

Interestingly, In the Journal of Discourses, Volume 11, P266, Brigham Young makes some interesting statements regarding the practice. While he does write about actually doing it, he also mentions that being polygamous in your heart has many benefits. It is interesting to think on what "Polygamy in your heart", might mean.

Some Mormons live very sheltered lives, or just dissemble about the issue because they think it is a secret or "private". I think it is cute how they dance around the real issues. What many may not realize is that gen X folk and younger have been exploring various aspects of polygamy for a long time. From 2010 until very recently, I was living in a house with both male and female residents and for a portion of that time, I was effectively the "House Mom", cooking the evening meal, and cleaning house. Sometimes it was all women, and others men were there too. There were no orgies, or drunken drug parties. From a purely sociological point of view, there were commonalities in our house with those that live polygamous relationships. Believe me, Mormons do not have the corner on the practice. If you are wont to do that, you can in our culture if no part of the relationship needs to be publicly documented.

I am polygamous in my heart, though I will never come any closer to actually experiencing it than I did in my previous experiences. What ever the GA says, I believe it can happen in non FLDS Mormon and other households and I have no issue with it. My only caveat would be that my own reaction to finding out about child abuse, wife abuse, or dysfunctional conduct would surpass any law known to man.

Link to comment

Interestingly, In the Journal of Discourses, Volume 11, P266, Brigham Young makes some interesting statements regarding the practice. While he does write about actually doing it, he also mentions that being polygamous in your heart has many benefits. It is interesting to think on what "Polygamy in your heart", might mean.

Some Mormons live very sheltered lives, or just dissemble about the issue because they think it is a secret or "private". I think it is cute how they dance around the real issues. What many may not realize is that gen X folk and younger have been exploring various aspects of polygamy for a long time. From 2010 until very recently, I was living in a house with both male and female residents and for a portion of that time, I was effectively the "House Mom", cooking the evening meal, and cleaning house. Sometimes it was all women, and others men were there too. There were no orgies, or drunken drug parties. From a purely sociological point of view, there were commonalities in our house with those that live polygamous relationships. Believe me, Mormons do not have the corner on the practice. If you are wont to do that, you can in our culture if no part of the relationship needs to be publicly documented.

I am polygamous in my heart, though I will never come any closer to actually experiencing it than I did in my previous experiences. What ever the GA says, I believe it can happen in non FLDS Mormon and other households and I have no issue with it. My only caveat would be that my own reaction to finding out about child abuse, wife abuse, or dysfunctional conduct would surpass any law known to man.

I don't see it as "working" for more than a very short time amongst very limited number of people. Population dynamics, and birth rates would end it in just a few generations. Plus add in all the societal problems of having large numbers of unattached young males, and it is courting disaster. That being said I'm all for personal choice and if all parties have given informed consent. Whom am I to object.

Link to comment

I don't see it as "working" for more than a very short time amongst very limited number of people. Population dynamics, and birth rates would end it in just a few generations. Plus add in all the societal problems of having large numbers of unattached young males, and it is courting disaster. That being said I'm all for personal choice and if all parties have given informed consent. Whom am I to object.

Well there are circumstances that we do not now face which could force the issue. Perhaps another war, using conscripts, with South America, China, or even a civil war here in America? To me, the talk of some people is just frightening. And a lot of the <40 folk I know do not even believe in our government. I just cringe when people say we have a democracy. I would rely on Heavenly Father to save us but the morality in the West continues to circle the drain.

I wonder what our population demographics were like just post the war of 1812? Something pushed Joseph Smith into polygamy, or at least talk of it. Just saying that God told him to do it is over simplification. Some how we keep avoiding an unheard of pandemic like the years of the Black Plague. What happens if disease suddenly out smarts us? I was recently on a very heavy course of two different antibiotics. Before that I was on a PICC line. What happens if economic and medical circumstances force doctors to just let many of us die?

Even 911 had people, particularly our government running around screaming like little girls. Rather than school the American people to defend themselves, they used to ensuing situation to program Americans to be helpless and dependent. We did not have the business people like we had after WWII, who had seen real trials, and came home to build a nation. Rather mostly all we have now are kids who have never known anything but plenty, and the only crisis many of them have faced is the girl they got pregnant, or how to wheedle Dad out of the car.

Many Mormons have been brought up in a situation where they never truly faced a test of their faith like many generations before them. My own parents were run out of Oklahoma by drought, so they did not have the choices that we had.

That tiny rock that blew up in Russia, injured 1100 people. What if that had happened over LA, or New York? I am sorry if I sound like a doom sayer. We just need to realize that for the time of human existence, things have been rather quiescent here on earth.

Link to comment

Sure, as long as government doesn't benefit more than the ideal. Hence gays should (and can in any state right now) marry all they want. Just don't give it legal status.

By that thinking, would you be just as ok if the government took away the tax exempt statice of say the Mormon church? You could still be Mormon and practice your religion, you just wouldn't get to write off your tithing and other church donations and the church would be forced to divert millions to the government in taxes. While every other church would still have a tax exemption. Sound ok with you???

Link to comment

By that thinking, would you be just as ok if the government took away the tax exempt statice of say the Mormon church? You could still be Mormon and practice your religion, you just wouldn't get to write off your tithing and other church donations and the church would be forced to divert millions to the government in taxes. While every other church would still have a tax exemption. Sound ok with you???

The government has always had that power. But Equality under the Law, plus the First Amendment, and European history are real barriers to taking that action against any one religious group.

Link to comment

The government has always had that power. But Equality under the Law, plus the First Amendment, and European history are real barriers to taking that action against any one religious group.

Exactly. And it is the same reasons why most Americans believe that gays should have Equity under the Law as well. We are all Americans.

Link to comment

Exactly. And it is the same reasons why most Americans believe that gays should have Equity under the Law as well. We are all Americans.

I'm all for gay's having equal rights under the law. Where I disagree is that marriage per say isn't a unrestricted right(none of them are), but a religious concept. That is why I'm in favor of getting the State out of the marriage business altogether, and make them all Domestic Partnerships(A legally enforceable contract).

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
Sure, as long as government doesn't benefit more than the ideal. Hence gays should (and can in any state right now) marry all they want. Just don't give it legal status.
By that thinking, would you be just as ok if the government took away the tax exempt statice of say the Mormon church? You could still be Mormon and practice your religion, you just wouldn't get to write off your tithing and other church donations and the church would be forced to divert millions to the government in taxes. While every other church would still have a tax exemption. Sound ok with you???

State recognition of gay marriage has never been about rights because gays have always been able to marry in any state. It's a welfare issue. Should I, because I belong to the LDS Church, receive welfare benefits on that basis? Of course not. On the other hand, the state does have a compelling reason to benefit the ideal marriage which has a lot to do with raising children with the proper male and female role models.

Link to comment
Bcspace what is the proper role model for males and females, and should the State tests parents annually to certify they are proper role models?

The proper role model is heterosexual husband and wife. Single parents also match because they are not united with the same sex. And no, the state should not certify, check for children, or otherwise second guess etc. All they need to do is benefit and recognize only this ideal. Everything else is legal as long as a reasonable age limit is set but not recognized by the state. I actually think plural marriages would be okay but recognized separately.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...