Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The March Continues: Up Next- Plural Marriage


Recommended Posts

Posted
8 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

He’s following the Prophet.

My other thought is that it would be incredible to see a Mormon object to someone’s right to marry more than one wife. In fact, it would be staggering.

Why would it be incredible? Plural marriage to living spouses is not a preaching or pratice in lds marriage.

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Exiled said:

Birth defects.  There is a higher chance of a harmful mutation expressing itself if the gene pool is closely related.

Platonic marriages, birth control, abortion.... all make this objection moot. Marriage is more about loving relationships and companionship and less about reproduction, or so we are told.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted
4 minutes ago, provoman said:

Why would it be incredible? Plural marriage to living spouses is not a preaching or pratice in lds marriage.

In fact, following the Prophet (and Jacob 2:30) would preclude any such notion.

Posted (edited)

In what way does the union of three consenting adults in Brazil have an impact on the (fluctuating) marital belief system of the <0.2% of the population that follow Mormonism?

(And by the way, one man + two wives, is exactly the kind of union Presidents Nelson and Oaks will be living in the eternities).

Edited by Marginal Gains
Posted
13 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Its not a relationship model that I think is preferable for society to promote because I believe that it creates an inequitable position for the women involved, however, I'm not in favor of laws prohibiting it.  And in some ways this kind of a relationship is preferable to him having a mistress on the side in that everything is out in the open.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

In what way does the union of three consenting adults in Brazil have an impact on the (fluctuating) marital belief system of the <0.2% of the population that follow Mormonism?

The ongoing movement to broaden what is accepted as marriage impacts everyone. Given the worldwide impact social media and pop culture, anything like this will have inordinate influences.

Not sure how the LDS system is in flux. It’s been quite the same for my 70 years and even before that. In fact, much of the animus towards the Church today is the direct result of its intransigence regarding new-tangled marriage schemes. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

The ongoing movement to broaden what is accepted as marriage impacts everyone. Given the worldwide impact social media and pop culture, anything like this will have inordinate influences.

Not sure how the LDS system is in flux. It’s been quite the same for my 70 years and even before that. In fact, much of the animus towards the Church today is the direct result of its intransigence regarding new-tangled marriage schemes. 

So, specifically, what impact will Ronaldinho’s union with two women have on your life and your belief system?

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

What were the moral ramifications of Joseph Smith unionising with multiple wives?

Apparently none now. Whatever floats the boat. None of your business.

 

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted
2 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

So, specifically, what impact will Ronaldinho’s union with two women have on your life and your belief system?

 

Just now, Bernard Gui said:

Apparently none now. Whatever floats the boat.

It was a simple enough question. On a thread you started. Oh well.

Posted
3 hours ago, ALarson said:

I've never objected to consenting adults deciding to live polygamy.  It's the marrying of 14 year old girls and other teens plus the lies told to hide this type of behavior (keeping the truth from their wife/wives) that is wrong to do, IMO.

The  definition of "adult" is neither numerical nor static.  

And wife number two is every bit as much a wife as wife number one.  But I agree openness is preferred to secrecy.

Posted
2 hours ago, provoman said:

Why would it be incredible? Plural marriage to living spouses is not a preaching or pratice in lds marriage.

Yet still canonical in LDS doctrine.  And as a valid eternal relationship it is only a matter of time till it will be represented in our eternal community.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

So, specifically, what impact will Ronaldinho’s union with two women have on your life and your belief system?

Who knows? Possibly deepening the destruction of the institution of marriage...between one man and one woman as defined in the Family declaration, increasing social and legal pressure on anyone who resists the changes, and bringing on the consequences we have been warned about by the Prophets. We are entering unknown treacherous territory.

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

It was a simple enough question. On a thread you started. Oh well.

My answer bounced off Jean’s comment. I thought that would’ve been clear, but I was wrong. She said:

Quote

Whatever floats their boat..if they are happy..not my business.

Please read it in context. See my response immediately above.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

If you thought the changes announced at the last General Conference were intense, just wait.

Polygamy is coming back? That would be intense.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted

The problem lies with trying to float your boat while simultaneously drilling holes in the bottom. High rates of divorce and single parenting are having unintended consequences on society in general. In the same way the ' one child rule ' in China is having serious implications in their culture. We play with institutions neither knowing nor caring about the long term effect.

Posted
2 hours ago, Exiled said:

Birth defects.  There is a higher chance of a harmful mutation expressing itself if the gene pool is closely related.

That is a good argument BUT if a requirement was made that one must become sterile so that no kids would result, what would be the next argument?

Posted
37 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Its not a relationship model that I think is preferable for society to promote because I believe that it creates an inequitable position for the women involved, however, I'm not in favor of laws prohibiting it.  And in some ways this kind of a relationship is preferable to him having a mistress on the side in that everything is out in the open.  

Having mistresses is as old as the hills around us, and even more so today in a pop culture where it is often celebrated. It’s only a problem when they sign a piece of paper. Note that living with the two (maybe three) ladies is not the problem for this star athlete. That appears to be a resume enhancer for him. Rather, it’s the proposal to marry them that is reprehensible.

Posted
7 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

The problem lies with trying to float your boat while simultaneously drilling holes in the bottom. High rates of divorce and single parenting are having unintended consequences on society in general. In the same way the ' one child rule ' in China is having serious implications in their culture. We play with institutions neither knowing nor caring about the long term effect.

Or hoping our fiddling about won’t come back to us with some unwanted consequences.

Posted
4 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

That is a good argument BUT if a requirement was made that one must become sterile so that no kids would result, what would be the next argument?

It's yucky to date your sister. :blink:

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Exiled said:

It's yucky to date your sister. :blink:

Consenting adults? Isn’t that the mantra that counts now?

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted
39 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

....Not sure how the LDS system is in flux. It’s been quite the same for my 70 years and even before that....

Two things in the last 70 years come to my mind right away.  The church leadership's views on interracial marriage and the abandonment of counseling gays to marry those of the opposite gender. 

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

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