1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Polygamy: Why not?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Perry White, Nov 21, 2006.

  1. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    I'm with Buck.

    Theoretically, pot should be legal, too. But it's not because we can't handle it.

    Most people do the polygamy thang don't do it responsibly.

    As I've said with so many of these "grey-area liberties" issues: Show me we're responsible enough to drink without getting behind the wheel, then come talk to me about the other stuff.
     
  2. lono

    lono Active Member

    Wow ... polygamy. What a great idea.

    Think of the possibilities:

    The phone calls at the office!

    The credit-card bills!

    The honeydew list!

    The mothers-in-law!

    The PMS!

    The "does my ass look fat in these pants?"!

    The jealousies!

    The rivalries!

    The hilarities

    I smell .. new REALITY SHOW!

    And we'll call it, "This Will Not End Well!"
     
  3. novelist_wannabe

    novelist_wannabe Well-Known Member

    I'm reminded of an Old Testament class I took at the small baptist junior college I went to. The issue of polygamy came up, and the instructor started talking about this biblical figure (Solomon, I think it was, but I'm not sure) who had 1,000 wives and what his life must have been like, given menstrual cycles. This is what he said that stuck with me: "What happens one week out of every four? Think about it. If you have 1,000 wives, that means every week, 250 of them ... Guys, this really is more than you can handle."

    Then there are the studies that indicate groups of women who live together often synchronize on their menstrual cycles.

    So I ask: Assuming you're married to at least four women, which would be worse, knowing that at any given time some among your wives will be menstruating, or knowing that all of them will be doing so at once?
     
  4. oldhack

    oldhack Member

    Pastor makes some good cautionary points early on, and while many here are making fine theoretical arguments for polygamy, I think you are not looking at the situation as it exists or at what polygamy fundamentally is.

    Polygamous sects (or cults) don't have the same definition of "consenting" that I think most of us do. When the whistle gets blown on polygamists, it's always because women are in effect forced into slavery, sexual as well as all other kinds.

    I think that's because the fundamental precept behind polygamy is that a man can determine to have more than one wife, and in a community where polygamy is tolerated, women have no equality and thus no right to consent. All polygamous cultures in this country are ruled by men, men are always the suitors and the culture forbids women to say no.
     
  5. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    The solution: mass hysterectomies. Hey, if you buy in bulk, you'll get a good deal.

    I keed, I keed. :D
     
  6. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    It's true - it happened to me throughout college. It would likely be the "all at once" scenario.

    -----------

    There's a great episode of 'King of Queens' where Leah Remini's character starts spending a lot of time with a guy at work -- shopping, going for coffee, watching junky romantic movies, dancing -- and he's called her "work husband." Incidentally -- he's gay.

    I'd love to have a 'husband' like that... Somebody who could advise me which shoes to wear with which outfit... or Does this look too slutty?... Someone in addition to Mr. Lugs of course.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page