Polygamy

[Mrleft8]

Why is polygamy illegal?

[stan v]

Why is abortion legal?

[Popeye]

see also "reefer madness"

[Mrleft8]

It can't be a Christian thing. I'm pretty sure that the Christian religion condones polygamy... So is it a societal thing? Or is there a medical reason...?

[Popeye]

IMHO one wifey is plenty.

[paladin]

It takes a lifetime to train ONE....who would want to try more than 1?

edited to read "lifetime".....

[ 06-29-2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: paladin ]

[Mrleft8]

It takes a WHAT?

[Bruce Hooke]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
It takes a WHAT?Note the letter on your keyboard that is just to the right of "k"... :D

[Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )]

During a bad divorce and a bad time for one of my female friends. We had her and her and her 3 kids living with us for about 3 weeks. One morning I awoke with a bit of the hair of the dog. Sat at the dinning room table that resembled the Walton's table. As my head was still focusing, not one but both women started in on me about what I needed to do and what I hadn't done. It was Nagging in stereo. In a moment of clarity with the kids screaming and both woman patting their backs, I said "Why would anyone would wanna be a Mormon" :D

[Mrleft8]

AH! GOTTCHA! :D

[WWheeler]

When we went to Saudi Arabia, the visa for my wife said (in Arabic), "entry for wife, one only".

Polygamy is not illegal in Islam, nor in Judaism in ancient times. (Read your Bible!) Supposedly, the Prophet wanted to do away with it, (he was limited himself to 1 wife) but he had to content himself with a limit of 5. Also, the male population of Arabia was so devastated during the period of conquest that marked the expansion of Islam, that polygamy was necessary to sustain the population.

Likewise, polyandry (multiple husbands, 1 wife) is a custom in a particular tribe in India. (This I'm told by an Indian guy at work.

[Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )]

popeye :D :D :D :D Spatter sheild :D

[Wild Dingo]

One possumpoop is more than enough! heck what would I call anothery?? :eek: "oi you!"?? chookpoop? goannadoodoos? nah one possumpoop is more than enough for one lifetime :cool: and sometimes I wonder about me sanity with that one! :eek: :D :D

now seriassly... why in blazes would a fella want more than one missus? one serves all yer needs... I mean she does get the remote of the coffee table beside you for you and gets a fellas beer when they need anothery and even looks after your wants by makin sure the barbies got gas in the tank pays the bills so you dont have to bother with it drives the hoons to the sporting events so you can muck around in the shed with boats etc etc... nah mates one is ample anothery would just confuse her :D

The onliest reason I could think of would be for a bit of the ol slap and tickle at those weird times of the month when its a closed shop :rolleyes: any other time and it would just be bedlam :D

[Sam F]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
It can't be a Christian thing. I'm pretty sure that the Christian religion condones polygamy... Uh... not on this planet.


Originally posted by WWheeler:

Polygamy is not illegal in Islam, nor in Judaism in ancient times. (Read your Bible!) Supposedly, the Prophet wanted to do away with it, (he was limited himself to 1 wife) but he had to content himself with a limit of 5.The Prophet didn’t do “limits”. Rather, he “contented” himself with considerably more wives – not to mention slaves and concubines… but they hardly count do they?
Here are the wives’ names:
KHADIJAH
SAWDA BINT ZAM'A
AISHA SIDDIQA
HAFSAH BINT U'MAR
ZAYNAB BINT KHUZAYMA
SALAMA BINT UMAYYA
ZAYNAB BINT JAHSH
JUWAYRIYA BINT AL-HARITH
SAFIYYA BINT HUYAYY
UMMU HABIBA BINT SUFYAN
MAYAMUNA BINT AL-HARITH
MARIA AL-QABTIYYA

[Popeye]

should'nt you be out painting the house or something?

[WWheeler]

Dear Sam:

How many wives/slaves/concubines did Abraham have?

Just wondering,

[brad9798]

I know guys with, two, three, some with even four wives ... just not at the same time!

Hell, sometimes women get upset when the waitress is too flirty ... imagine that in your own house! ;)

[WWheeler]

Apparently Abraham's wives are also a burning issue in Islam, Abraham being a prophet of Islam as well as the Judeo-Christian tradition. From "Islam today".


Faith & Practice - Ethics & Values - Culture & Society - Politics & Economics - Other

Question and Answer Details

Name Mike - Aruba
Topic Other
Title Abraham's Wives
Question Was there any animosity between the two wives of Prophet Abraham, and what were they?
Date 2003/8/12

Name of Consultant Amani Aboul Fadl Farag
Content of Reply

Salaam Mike,

Thank you for your question.

I was rather hesitant to answer your question because I don't like to give hypothetical answers! Actually, according to the genuine Islamic sources, the nature of the relationship between the two noble ladies was not described.

All that we know from the Qur’an and hadith(sayings of the prophet Muhammad – peace and blessings be upon him) is that Prophet Abraham took a second wife; Hajar, who was a girl slave to his first sterile wife Sarah.

It was Sarah's decision to offer her maid to her husband, Prophet Abraham, in marriage to beget him a son. Hajar begot a child; Prophet Ismael - for Prophet Abraham. Then Sarah, with a miracle of Allah, was blessed also with a child; Prophet Isaac, when she was nearly ninety.

Later, Prophet Abraham had to submit to the will of His Lord by taking his second wife, Hajar, and her child to the deserted place of Makkah in the Arab Peninsula. This was where - after a hard time - they settled. Then, started the new lineage, which is termed "Arabs".

That's all what we know for sure about this story and are asked to believe in. Any other story was taken from both the Old and the New Testaments. This is why I define it as hypothesis, which I read out of curiosity, but cannot take as a fact.

It says in the Genesis that after Hajar had married Prophet Abraham - as planned by her Lady Sarah - and had begotten her child, she started to behave arrogantly towards her Lady.

It is also said that Sarah complained to her husband about that and he gave her a free hand in dealing with Hajar. So she decided to dismiss her, with her child, to the wilderness. Then on her way, Hajar met angels, who gave her the glad tiding of a bright future for her son, as a master of that land.

My own personal evaluation of the story, as such, is that it is unfair. It portrays an image of all its characters, which is far from the model example of a prophetic household. It can be accepted that Sarah felt jealous, as it is the human nature of all women, but it cannot be accepted that she, a noble lady and a wife of a prophet, could have had such cruelty and vice in her heart.

Prophet Abraham could have never had such cruelty, to kill his own wife and son in the wilderness, unless he was inspired by divine commands. Never, of course, just to satisfy a wife! Also Hajar, is not believed to have been so ungrateful towards her own old lady!

This is all that I know of the different interpretations of this aspect of our Prophet Abraham's life and Allah knows best. For more details, Ibn Kathir's book: Stories of the Prophets, is now available in English. What is important about this reference is that it tells what part of each story is of an Islamic origin and what is of a biblical one.

Thank you again for your question and please keep in touch.

Salaam.

[ahp]

Way back then, being a wife, even being one of several, was the only Social Security available.

[Sam F]

Originally posted by WWheeler:
Dear Sam:

How many wives/slaves/concubines did Abraham have?

Just wondering,Three wives I think... but Abraham wasn't Christian was he? Mohammad of course out did him by quite a bit...
And back the reason polygamy isn't legal... It is because we live in a civilization whose major influence is Christianity. Besides being one of the most idiotic ways imaginable to organize a "family", polygamy is banned by Christianity.
Therefore it has been unacceptable in Western Civilization. Did I mention how STOOPID it is too? :rolleyes:

[WWheeler]

PS It looks like Moslems are also keen students of the Bible, (at least the Old Testament).

[Sam F]

Originally posted by WWheeler:
PS It looks like Moslems are also keen students of the Bible, (at least the Old Testament).Muslims may be but Mohammad was not. He consistently got the stories wrong.

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
Why is polygamy illegal?Soooo... who you got your eye on Lefty - and does Mrs. Lefty #1 know? ;)

[WWheeler]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by WWheeler:
PS It looks like Moslems are also keen students of the Bible, (at least the Old Testament).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Muslims may be but Mohammad was not. He consistently got the stories wrong. Example?

[Alan D. Hyde]

As I recall from a learned discussion in Oxford long ago, both the law and the Christianity with respect to concubinage are historically far from clear.

Alan

[John Meachen]

Considering that each wife involves acquiring another mother in law,what's the attraction of polygamy?

[Meerkat]

Yeah - polyandry sounds like a much better deal! Sharing a wife sounds much more economically just! ;)

[huisjen]

Does anybody else remember the scene from the movie "Sahara" (Bogart or Jim Belushi, I actually like the later version better) where the Okie asks the Sudanese about Islam and polygamy?

The Sudanese responds that Islam teaches that a man may have up to four wives. One is lonely. Two bicker. With three, two will gang up on one. But with four there is harmony.

The Okie then asks if the Sudanese really has four wives. The Sudanese laughs and says, "I don't think that my wife would like that."

Dan

[Dolly Varden]

I remember the scene now that you mention it. I did not know there was a remake of the original. Belushi substituting for Bogart? You have to be kidding?

[Mrleft8]

Christianity surely must condone polygamy.

[Garrett Lowell]

You can have as many wives as you can afford! :D

[Mrleft8]

Several people have mentioned why polygamy is undesirable, but so far no one has said why it's illegal....

[J_Boat]

This pages speaks to the issue.....

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4074.asp

[Mrleft8]

Originally posted by J_Boat:
This pages speaks to the issue.....

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4074.aspNo. It speaks to the issue of an iterpretation of the bible, not the laws of the land, or the fact that Jesus has multiple wives.

[Figment]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
Why is polygamy illegal?Whatsa matter? Is the current income tax code not complicated enough for you? :D

StanV touched on it in the first response. Just as there is now political effort to outlaw abortion as an issue of morality, at one point in history polygamy was outlawed. Just as, at some very early point in time, murder was outlawed.

I don't equate the three issues, of course, but they are related in that they all are the product of a blurry mix of politics and morality/religion that was eventually distilled into a written law.

Though J_Boat's link to answersingenesis doesn't really answer the question, it does remind us of the HIGHLY interpretive nature of our society's approach to morality/religion. For much of our society's history, religion and government were one. At some point in that history, that religion/government INTERPRETED that polygamy was immoral, and therefore illegal.

I speculate that you've already reasoned-out the above for yourself, and that you're really asking "Who first made polygamy illegal, when did they do so, and under what specific motive?", but I was having fun hashing it out in my head so I figured I'd have more fun by writing it out. My thanks for the indulgence.
I have a personal rule against engaging in discussion of politics or religion down here, but you got me with this one. Good, juicy question.

[Garrett Lowell]

Jesus has multiple wives? Wow, I thought that dude died, like, 2000 years ago. You better tip him off that it's illegal, at least here in the U.S. Maybe he'll put a good word in for you with his pops!

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Why on earth would anyone want more than one wife?

However, I remember a chat with a former employer's Malaysian business partner. The Dato (a bumiputra, of course) on a visit to Hong Kong, heading back to the office after lunch, suddenly veered off into a jeweller's ship (HK has a lot of those!) and bought three expensive ladies' watches.

Seeing my eyebrows rise, he explained:

"I offer Number One Wife a choice of two. She sees that she is getting the choice of presents, so she is happy.

"I offer Number Two Wife the choice of the remaining two - she thinks she is being treated better than Number One, so she is happy.

"And I give the remaining one to my mistress, who will be extremely grateful. That's the only investment that I'll get any return on!" :D

[huisjen]

Having a bunch of celebate "wives" (nuns) after you've been gone for a couple hundred (or thousand) years doesn't really do you much good, does it?

I remain under the impression that he only had the one: Mary Magdalen

Dan

[Jack Heinlen]

Forgive the roughness of this. I searched and searched and could not come up with one cleaner, oddly. Could have typed it in in the time I spent.

John 4:5-425

So he came to a Samaritan city called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6Jacob’s well was there, and Jesus, tired out by his journey, was sitting by the well. It was about noon. 7A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, ‘Give me a drink.’ 8(His disciples had gone to the city to buy food.) 9The Samaritan woman said to him, ‘How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?’ (Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.) 10Jesus answered her, ‘If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink,” you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.’ 11The woman said to him, ‘Sir, you have no bucket, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water? 12Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob, who gave us the well, and with his sons and his flocks drank from it?’ 13Jesus said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, 14but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.’ 15The woman said to him, ‘Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.’ 16Jesus said to her, ‘Go, call your husband, and come back.’ 17The woman answered him, ‘I have no husband.’ Jesus said to her, ‘You are right in saying, “I have no husband”; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true!’ 19The woman said to him, ‘Sir, I see that you are a prophet. 20Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.’ 21Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. 24God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.’ 25The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming’ (who is called Christ). ‘When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us.’ 26Jesus said to her, ‘I am he, the one who is speaking to you.’
27 Just then his disciples came. They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman, but no one said, ‘What do you want?’ or, ‘Why are you speaking with her?’ 28Then the woman left her water jar and went back to the city. She said to the people, 29‘Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah, can he?’ 30They left the city and were on their way to him. 31Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, ‘Rabbi, eat something.’ 32But he said to them, ‘I have food to eat that you do not know about.’ 33So the disciples said to one another, ‘Surely no one has brought him something to eat?’ 34Jesus said to them, ‘My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to complete his work. 35Do you not say, “Four months more, then comes the harvest”? But I tell you, look around you, and see how the fields are ripe for harvesting. 36The reaper is already receiving wages and is gathering fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together. 37For here the saying holds true, “One sows and another reaps.” 38I sent you to reap that for which you did not labor. Others have labored, and you have entered into their labor.’ 39Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, ‘He told me everything I have ever done.’ 40So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them; and he stayed there two days. 41And many more believed because of his word. 42They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world.’

[Mrleft8]

Huh? :confused:

[Jack Heinlen]

Jesus said to her, ‘Go, call your husband, and come back.’ The woman answered him, ‘I have no husband.’ Jesus said to her, ‘You are right in saying, “I have no husband”; for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true!’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, I see that you are a prophet. It's the only Christian Testament passage that I'm aware of that speaks of the issue of multiple spouses. It's from the NSRV, and I think it's pretty ambiguous as to the nature of multiple partners. Jesus might be read as chastising the woman for having so many husbands, or he might simply be observing, though the fact of his intuition would seem to indicate a particular morallity of the time.

[ 07-01-2004, 08:41 AM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[Mrleft8]

....So she was a 5 times widow?...
And this still does nothing to answer the question of why polygamy is illegal....

[stan v]

And how is this important to you? :rolleyes:

Is polygamy accepted in powerful Caribbean countries?

(I must have been thinking of MM when I typed tp, instead of pt. tp..toilet paper? :D )

[ 07-01-2004, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: stan v ]

[Mrleft8]

Is it WHAT? Ultra fast edit!

[ 07-01-2004, 08:45 AM: Message edited by: Mrleft8 ]

[Jack Heinlen]

Sorry Doug, my error. I hit post when I wanted to add more.

[Mrleft8]

Originally posted by Jack Heinlen:
Sorry Doug, my error. I hit post when I wanted to add more.No problem Jack! ;)

[Mrleft8]

So no one knows of any real reason for polygamy to be illegal (aside from the nagging wife/evil mother-in-law issue). If we assume for just a moment, that religeous doctrine has no influence over the laws of a society where separation of church and state is one of the basic tennents, is there any medical reason to outlaw polygamy?

[stan v]

:rolleyes:

If you're concerned about medical issues, start a thread on gay lifestyle. Maybe that should be outlawed? :eek:

[Jack Heinlen]

is there any medical reason to outlaw polygamy No, I don't think there is. There is a good medical reason against promiscuity, disease, but none against polygamy.

Why DO you ask? I see much psychological difficulty with it, in our current state of awareness. I'm a jealous booger.

The Jungian take is that monogamy is, usually, for raising children, and after the children are raised it is a natural tendency of both men and women to seek solace for unrequited aspects of their being in other people. But Jung was a randy pagan. smile.gif

[ 07-01-2004, 09:05 AM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[Ian McColgin]

OK - Short form.

Today more societies accept polygamy than do not, but the actual practice is rare as having more than one spouse is expensive. It's a sign of power and wealth.

It's also a form of oppression. In early societies whether the oldest matriarchal or the historic era patriarchies, polygamy was like the later droits of the king. More possessions.

One of the gifts to the world of the grecco-roman civilization was marriage to only one other at a time. It's associated with the beginnings of women having some property rights of their own, as opposed to merely being property. Church leaders from Augustine to Luther recognised that there's no biblical prohibition against polygamy but regarded monogamy as more moral.

In addition to property issues, the early christians gave marriage a spiritual overtone that it had not had before and one spouse has more in common with monotheism.

Actual legislation came in the christian west well after the custome of monotheism was so well entrenched that occasional violations, like the Mormons, offended community standards.

But the reason for not permitting polygamy is a good one: It's associated with one sex, now always women, having a lower legal status.

I personally believe that good societies and good ethics can allow for multiple loving relationships in many forms, including sexual, and I see no reason to limit weddings to people of opposite sexes, but to me the logic of liberation limits state sanctioned wedding to just two people of equal power.

Three way may be fun for a night but a troika makes for tough sledding. And a four-in-hand . . . lets not overload this metaphore.

[George G]

Maybe there is a biological reason.

If you live in a society where many men die a violent death, and of those left, a few amass power and wealth while the rest are reduced to slavery or poverty, then it makes sense for the women, of whom there will be a surplus, to marry the "winners" - even if they have to share them. That way they are more likely to have children who will survive and inherit their father's useful agressiveness and wealth. You see that in warrior Arab cultures, in the mistresses and "jus prima noctis" of medieval warlords, and in the mulatto kids of slave owners, which in Brazil, at least, often got to be free and even inherit the plantation.

But if you live in a society where there is roughly even number of men and women, and where your keds are more likely to succeed if there are fewer of them and they get both parent's undivided care and inheritance, then poligamy and lots of offspring make no sense.

The law just ends up sanctioning what culture evolved for practical reasons.

[Mrleft8]

You'd think that a multiple mother household would offer a More nurturing enviroment for any offspring. Certainly the argument that single parent households contribute to the moral decline of society should be an indication that polygamy should not only be condoned, but in certain sectors of society, ENCOURAGED....

[Sam F]

Originally posted by WWheeler:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by WWheeler:
PS It looks like Moslems are also keen students of the Bible, (at least the Old Testament).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Muslims may be but Mohammad was not. He consistently got the stories wrong. Example?</font>[/QUOTE]You probably know this, but Islam’s texts consist of two testaments: The Qur’an (Koran) and the Hadith. The Qur’an is divided into Surahs (verses). The Hadith is the Holy Tradition of Mohammad which is composed of authentic memories of Mohammad’s life as told by his followers. This is made up of 6 books. All of Islam’s texts are available in on-line versions and I highly recommend browsing through them. I guarantee you’ll be struck by the radical difference between Islam and Christian texts… provided of course, you know the OT (Old Testament) and NT (New…) – these days a problematic assumption.

Mohammad was almost certainly illiterate and probably heard only oral versions of various religions’ texts. He seems to have been influenced by Arab folklore, heretical Christian sects, Zoroastrianism and contemporary pagan beliefs. Many stories in the Qur’an have no correspondence with the OT at all, such as the story of Solomon leading an army of men, birds and Jinn (!) through the Valley of the Ants (Surah 27:17 – 19). In another, Moses meets one of Allah’s servants and accompanies him while he; sinks a boat, performs a “righteous” murder and rebuilds a wall to preserve the buried treasure under it (Surah 18:60 -082). I don’t recall anything like that from the OT. Do you?
In complete contradiction to the OT, Mohammad names Haman as Pharaoh’s minister event though in the OT, Haman is Babylonian and much later in history.
A Samaritan is anachronistically present during the Golden Calf episode:

((Allah)) said: "We have tested thy people in thy absence: the Samiri [Samaritan] has led them astray."
So Moses returned to his people in a state of indignation and sorrow. He said: "O my people! did not your Lord make a handsome promise to you? Did then the promise seem to you long (in coming)? Or did ye desire that Wrath should descend from your Lord on you, and so ye broke your promise to me?"
They said: "We broke not the promise to thee, as far as lay in our power: but we were made to carry the weight of the ornaments of the (whole) people, and we threw them (into the fire), and that was what the Samiri suggested.
"Then he brought out (of the fire) before the (people) the image of a calf: It seemed to low: so they said: This is your god, and the god of Moses, but (Moses) has forgotten!(Surah 20: 85 – 88)

Another example of Mohammad’s variance from the OT is how the story of Moses and the burning bush is told differently three times: “But when he came to the (fire), a voice was heard:
"Blessed are those in the fire and those around: and glory to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. …” (Surah 27:8)
And
“But when he came to the (fire), a voice was heard from the right bank of the valley, from a tree in hallowed ground: "O Moses! Verily I am Allah, the Lord of the Worlds....” (Suran 28:30)
And
“But when he came to the fire, a voice was heard: "O Moses! Verily I am thy Lord! therefore (in My presence) put off thy shoes: thou art in the sacred valley Tuwa.” (Surah 20: 11 – 12)

Want more examples? There are lots more but I suggest that you don’t take my word for any of it. Go look for yourself.

[Sam F]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
You'd think that a multiple mother household would offer a More nurturing enviroment for any offspring. Certainly the argument that single parent households contribute to the moral decline of society should be an indication that polygamy should not only be condoned, but in certain sectors of society, ENCOURAGED....Did I mention how STOOPID polygamy is?
Do the math. There is approximately a 1 to 1 ratio of men to women. If half the men have just two wives where does that leave the rest of the men?
Duh! :rolleyes:

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Sam F:
Boring text of Sam's favorite "hate Islam" theme elidedWell, just maybe, the Muslims had:

* A different source of the myth(s).

* Middle eastern religions are all a mass of mythical mumbo jumbo anyway, so who gives a flying camel's tail anyway! tongue.gif :D

[paladin]

...wishing THEY had two wives....ain't that the way it always izz... trying to beat the Joneses...... :D

[Jack Heinlen]

Again, leaving aside issues of morallity, and Ian's social justice, for me, I can't imagine being one of several or many. I can't imagine asking a woman to do that either. It doesn't suit me, and I can't say why. Maybe I'm a prude.

Re the issue of nurturance of children, Gary Snyder proposed some interesting thoughts back in the seventies. It was a part of the communal living movement, and it made sense to me.

People living as a tribe, an extended family(with social barriers to dalliance and all its complication)makes good sense for the rearing of children. It's really just an extension of what I grew up with. If my mother needed to go somewhere for the day she had no hesitation calling the neighbor woman, also with kids, and shuffling me off. It still happens in rural areas, though not so much, and that's unfortunate. It was Snyder's extended family, and communal living, without all the complication of common land etc.

What is your point Doug? You seem to be gnawing on a bone of some import. Are you going to keep it to yourself, or let us in on it?

[George G]

> You'd think that a multiple mother household would offer a More nurturing enviroment for any offspring.

Not if there isn't enough dough for everyone - and there never is, right?

A multiple-woman household might be great for rearing SMALL kids, when one can watch the other's baby at basically no cost.

But just wait till they are older and its time to discuss inheritance, or which son gets to inherit dad's social and political position, or which one goes to the expensive college...

> I can't imagine being one of several or many.

I bet you could if the choice was staying in your father's tent without sex, until he dies and what remained of your status evaporates...

What else can you do if you half the men in your tribe get killed in warfare or fights, while only a quarter of the women die during childbirth?

[J_Boat]

Originally posted by J_Boat:
This pages speaks to the issue.....

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4074.aspWell, you're correct. That page does not speak directly to the 'legal' issues. I thought that since the thread/discussion had wondered around the judeo-christian stuff a little, that page might shed a little light on some (not all) of the christian/religious dynamics. Combine that with the fact that much of our law comes from british common law and judeo-christian traditions, and it seemed relevant to me. Maybe I'm off base. Whatever.

HHhhmmmmm.... ponder... ponder .... What does that last part mean? "...or Jesus has multiple wives"? Huh? What?

[J_Boat]

OOoops.
I was trying to quote Mrleft8's response to my earlier post.

His response said:

"No. It speaks to the issue of an iterpretation of the bible, not the laws of the land, or the fact that Jesus has multiple wives."

[NormMessinger]

Originally posted by Mrleft8:
You'd think that a multiple mother household would offer a More nurturing enviroment for any offspring. Ah, but that is what grandmothers are for. There is a reason women stop ovulating while still relatively young.

[Meerkat]

Sam, you shouldn't get upset over the Muslim fairy tales being different from your Christian fairy tales - after all, they're only fairy tales! :D

BTW, there has never been a shred of evidence, outside the bible, that the Jews where ever enslaved in Egypt. Ewps! ;)

[SC-Lion]

To understand why it's illegal in the US I think you need to look at the beginning of the Mormon religion as well as the beliefs of Christianity. Jon Krakauer wrote an excellent book, "Under the Banner of Heaven" that covered some of the history of the Mormon Church as a primer to an in depth look at current day Mormon Fundamentalist and murder “in the name of God”.

I read the book last year and most of the details around the legality in the US have left me, along with the book. If I remember correctly Christianity and fear of the Mormons growing power resulted in formally outlawing polygamy and driving the Mormons West. I do remember that the threat of the US military attacking was the impetus for the Mormon Church to officially ban multiple wives.

According to the book modern day Mormon Fundamentalist can, and do, afford to have multiple wives, most with multiple children due to the way our welfare and other aid systems work.

Anyways it’s a great read. If you don’t know much about the Mormons, as I didn’t, I recommend it highly. The Mormon’s are the fastest growing religion in the US. The church also is very political and votes as one (the church tells members how to vote).

Wild Dingo, monthly timing will synchronize with females after a short amount of time living together :confused: .

-Gary

[Mrleft8]

The question devolved from a news bit I saw on Sunday night about a small group of people living in Arizona, who are polygamous. The fact that this group had basically enslaved certain members (young women), and ostrasized other members who spoke out against it aside, I began wondering just WHY polygamy is illegal. If laws are created to protect individuals, and society as a whole, based on the religious teachings of one group, but are anathemic to another, is it a just law? The fact that polygamy laws are ignored in many states (until they become major political issues) are they enforcable in a court of law? Consider the old "blue laws" that prohibited the sale of certain goods on Sundays.... Based on a notion of Sunday as the "sabbath". Now consider that if these laws had been created with Judaism in mind, not Christianity, those prohibitions would have been from sundown on Friday until sunup on Sunday (If I'm wrong about the Jewish sabbath, my appologies). Those laws like the Christian based "blue laws" would have been basically ignored, thereby rendering them unenforcable.

[Jack Heinlen]

Wild Dingo, monthly timing will synchronize with females after a short amount of time living together It's been found that women living in close proximity tend to synchronize their menses. No one knows just why or how. I wager Shane has personal experience. :D

Doug,

It's an interesting question, and it strikes to the heart of many debates these days. Why do fifty percent of marraiges end in divorce? For example. I've heard modern man woman relationships, for many, described as serial monogamy. In my current circumstance I think I'd settle. ;)

[Alan D. Hyde]

Jack, consider the way statistics work:

Suppose we have ten married couples.

Ten marriages.

Three get divorced and remarried.

That's now thirteen marriages.

Of the three, two divorce their second spouses, and marry again.

That's fifteen marriages.

One of the two remarries and is divorced two more times.

The other of the two remarries and is divorced three more times.

That's twenty marriages.

And ten divorces.

BUT, half of all married people in this example DON'T get divorced. Seven of that first ten are still hitched. The serial matrimonialists have pulled the average down.

***

Alan

[Mrleft8]

Well.... It was certainly nice to have a discussion about an abstract concept without it devolving (with a few notable exceptions, that I'm glad were ignored)into a political, or ethical food fight.

[George G]

Yes. But how come no women commented? Not interested in the subject? Or just watching to see what the guys think?

[Meerkat]

The biggest point against polygamy is that you'd never be able to take a shower with all the pantyhose hanging up to dry on the shower rod in the bathroom. :D

[Mrleft8]

Originally posted by Meerkat:
The biggest point against polygamy is that you'd never be able to take a shower with all the pantyhose hanging up to dry on the shower rod in the bathroom. :D Do they have panty hose in Utah?

[Meerkat]

Good question!

And, do they even shave their legs? :eek: ;) :D