Since society has devolved into actually entertaining topics like gay marriage, gay couples adopting kids, day after pill, promoting teen pomiscuity, etc...why not let's take it a step further and discuss Multiple wives and mistresses and how in some countires(Mostly Muslim) this is highly promoted and supported. and We all know the Mormons have been doing it for decades. So why is having multiple wives such a no-no in America?
Because it is not good for the United States. Its not the family unit that will work for the well-being of our country. It frightening really to think what the secular would do with it. At least in a religous environment it is held to some sort of a moral standard. What works best is one man and one woman. So that is how the institution should stay. Society doesn't have to endorse all couplings and things don't have to be fair to all various lifestyles.
Even though I am not realy for the practice there is no good reason for it to be agianst the law. I could under rules about only getting tax breaks for one spouse (though I dont think those are right either). Frankly marriage should be between the people and their Church. As long as no one is forced and all are of legal age why not alow people to live their lives as they wish? Freedom often means alowing things you dont agree with.
We do have freedom to live and raise children in the lifestyle of choice.---But freedom has nothing to do with making all lifestyles equal in marriage.
So how can it not work? If there are several wives, and few work and few stay home tending to the children, wouldn't it make it eaiser to home school and get the kids out of the failing liberal public school system? Why not? Is discrimination ok in some instances when all parties are consenting adaults but not in others?
The restriction serves no good purpose on our society, especially when they can live like that anyway. Marriage should be delt with on the Church leval. The state should stay out of the whole thing, it is unfortionate that they have gotten involved. The life styles of my neibors have no bearing on my life as long as they hurt no one or abridge my rights. Adults can say they are married and I dont care. Unless the Church conducts the service they are not married, that includes a justice of the peace. The states involvment in the issue is harming our country not helping it.
If we are talking about Mormans---maybe. But for the secular crowd we are just encouraging the concept of orgies. Yes. Discrimination is a good thing and you practice it everyday. To not be able to discriminate behaviors would be a rather idiotic society--and self-destructive at that.
Marriage is not a "church" thing. If that were the case---it would be unconstitutional. Its a policy thing with a purpose to encourage a strong future through strong families.
makes sense. cuts down on needy psycho homewreckers too. apparently. So far, Gay marriage is a-OK but Polyamy marriages are Devil spawn? kinda twisted logic people. carry on.
What's the difference? what makes Mormons so special? But this ^ is what's happening daily. deterioration of values. aka gay marriage.
The perpose is taxes and property rights, those are the reason the state got involved in it. Strong families and the future had nothing or at least very little to do with it. As to the marriage being or not being a "Church" thing that is something me and you will never agree on. I consider marraige the binding of two souls in the sight of God. Anything else is just the state sticking its nose were it does not belong.
Mormans at least have a moral code that can keep things structured, beneficial for children and spouses and keep the group family centered. Morality is considered out-dated and restrictive to the secular crowd. A lack of morals leads to self-gratification, selfishness, irresponsiblity and broken families. For the secular crowd it would begin with an orgie and the prospect of a family centered attitude from all the parties is not realistic., I'm not sure what your point is here.
Crawdadr- A marriage is a legal contract, and governments determine the legal aspects of any contract. Many people like to sign that contract during a religious ceremony, but that doesn't make it any more valid/binding. In fact many nonreligious people get married all the time. The reason organized religion has brainwashed its followers into believing it is something other than what it is, is so they can claim the moral high ground, and religious exemption of the state to interfere. Since before written language even existed, marriage has been about ownership, property rights, and protection of those rights. Churches/religions can make false claims of ownership of marriage, but with or without the consent of the Church, you need a court to break a marriage, and a divorce is nothing more than a contract renegotiation, between the parties of the original agreement. So you can indeed get married in a Church, the contract of marriage isnt valid unless there is an application license/permit issued by the controlling factor, the government, and even after the religious ceremony, the contract is not complete until it has been registered with the state. As long as the contract is mutually acceptable between all adult parties, and each member benefits from the agreement, then the government needs to stay out of the picture. If the individuals want to complicate the issue by allowing their religion of choice to butt in then that is there choice as well, but religion does not own marriage.
What about that Pastor Robert Jeffries that was busted having sex with his daughters and young wives? So not all Mormons follow a sacred code. that's BS. If Polygamy is taught properly in schools would you have a different view of it? the point is the deterioration of values is already happening so why not add Polygamy to the mix?
So secular people only take multible wives for orgies? If you know I discriminate, show me where? BTW, me discriminating on my own terms is much different than having my terms pushed onto other people through government force.
The governemnt is probbaly the LEAST qualified group of people to police morality. Those lawyers are not the modal citizens I would like my children to learn from. I can supply examples but I dont think we alow that kind of smut on these boards.
The government doesn't police morality. But society can decide what type of marriage arrangement government encourages.
But that is just it why should government bar certain types of marriage? Let look at the worst thing that could happen under group marraige, a bunch of people say they are married but only get the tax breaks for two. They may do some freaky things in their bedroom (which is legal without marriage). A group of adults take care of the children instead of just one or sending them to day care. Big house sale go up. Now none of that effects me, harms the community, or infringes on anyone elses rights. My Church still will not consider them married and niether will my children becuase I am teaching them morality not my neibors.
You are right--it is legal now to live that way. And if you think that children brought up in that situation is a good thing and that the family situation of 3 moms and 2 dads are a good thing---then write your congress man about it and get things changed. But I imagine you might be pretty young to think such an arrangement is good for society and should be encouraged. Most voting age adults would probably vote no.
Once the gays get their right to marry... ... next the M&M's (Mormons & Muslims)... ...gonna want their right... ... to polygamous marriages.
