Quantcast
This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Listen to this interview and hear the next battle on the marriage slippery slope!

Years ago Dr. C. Everett Koop, Dr. Francis Schaeffer, and Dr. James Dobson warned us of the slippery slope in the sanctity of life issue, and rightfully so.

Now society seems poised to enter another brave new world of mutated sacred institutions: polygamous marriage.

With the battle for traditional marriage losing ground daily under the siege of Gay Rights Activists, it can hardly be a shock when the marriage definition is further expanded. Once a word has no specific definition, any and all definitions are fair game.

Talk show host, Thom Hartmann, queries Mark Henkel, Polygamy rights advocate, who defends the next battle to expand the definition of marriage to polygamous unions.

God-fearing patriots from coast to coast must wake up and rise up!

How can God bless America if she turns her back on the very principles and biblical bedrock of her founding?

h/t Clash Daily

 

It's FINALLY HERE!
Kevin Jackson's hilarious take on Race-Pimping: The Multi-Trillion Dollar Business of Liberalism!

Enjoy this excerpt from the book:

"Meanwhile, you are firmly in control. If (actually, when) you experience problems with poverty, crime, gangs, lack of urban development in cities where you have a black mayor, a black congressman, a black city manager, a black superintendent of schools, a black county treasurer, a black chief of police, a black fire chief, blacks on the county Board of Supervisors, blacks on the school board, etc., find ONE white man, preferably a Republican to blame for all those problems. If one doesn’t exist, don’t be afraid to refurbish one, even if you have to blame Republican Presidents George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Herbert Hoover, or T.R. Roosevelt."

Pre-Order Now!
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

  • Wesley James Clark

    FOUR BLONDES!!!! THAT IS ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS @.@

    • bobmigs

      the only sane comment

  • MeriKae Murie Leavitt

    The reporter is terrible at his job because it is the FUNDAMENTALIST LDS who are involved in polygamy, True Latter Day Saints do NOT. so this guy NEEDS to educate himself on his Mormon’s or course he probably does not even know that there are fundamentalists who call themselves mormon’s…this guy is truly UNEDUCATED…sad when I speak I like to know that what I am saying is true so that I don’t sound like such a foolish uneducated hate monger.

    • Utahlady

      You are correct It is the FLDS who are the Plygs and do indeed have roots with the LDS church, but the modern day LDS have banned Polygamy, and have since Utah became a US state.

      • Idaho Bob

        The LDS has a serious issue that they simply sweep under the carpet. That problem is that Joesph Smith claimed to be a prophet. If a prophet is wrong in any point, regardless of how big or small, that prophet is not of God (Deuteronomy 18:22). In regard to Doctrine and Covenants 132, this is what the LDS has published:
        “Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant and the principle of plural marriage. Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831″.
        By banning the practice of polygamy (plural marriage), which was an everlasting covenant according to Smith, the LDS church has publicly announced that Smith is a false prophet. The sad reality, though, is that the LDS church has not banned polygamy in it’s entirety, it has only put a moratorium on it in the USA for political correctness sake. In countries north and south of the border, as well as overseas, polygamy is practiced by the LDS church (both mainstream and fundamental). It’s simply kept quite. This is hypocrisy at it’s best.

        Speaking of having multiple wives, Joesph Smith tied this practice into his false doctrine of God when he wrote in D&C 132:20, “Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them”.
        To take this idea even further, Lorenzo Snow is quoted as saying, “As man is, God once was; As God is, man will be”.
        This is just plain blasphemous taking after the sinful lust of Lucifer who said, “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:14).

        • Utahlady

          Thank you for your time and explanation. Much of this I am aware of, mainly because I live in Utah. I just really did not want to get into it. I am not nor will I be LDS. I practice and follow my own beliefs and Church. However I love my LDS neighbors and friends for the way they live on this earth and treat me and others daily and when trouble strikes. I do not criticize any one for their religious preferences or lack of ,as long as they do not infringe upon my life. Thus I dislike anyone planning on bringing children into this world with the expectation that I, as a taxpayer ,will pay the bill for them.
          Polygamist fall into this category.
          I do have concerns, not necessarily hate filled, but sincere re the breakdown of the family. With the onslaught of the progressive secularists and their overall lack of concern and knowledge re the causes of the breakdown of a society. I fear our goose, on this earth, is cooked.

          • tcidda

            ME TO UTAH and I LIVE IN MI.

        • Robert Hutton

          GOD tells ALL SERIOUS INVESTIGATORS WHO JOSEPH SMITH IS and why the TRINITARIANS FAKED A FALSE god spawned at Nicea.

          :-)

          • Idaho Bob

            All I can say to you Robert is that if you call yourself a Christian, by the comments that you have posted on this site, it would be a hard position to defend. A Christian is to be able to teach and communicate without malice, “And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will (2 Timothy 2:24-26)”.

            You may want to go back and examine yourself as Paul has admonished us to do, “Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified (2 Corinthians 13:5)”.

            I’ll be praying for you.

          • tcidda

            ok preacher man whatever u say.

          • Idaho Bob

            Tcidda, thank you for the encouragement. It’s always good to know that the Word of God has had an impact on someone’s life. I hope that you are blessed this day and that God may grant you the wisdom to walk in His Truth.

          • FC

            I know some have grown bitter and you have to understand, that for most of you, this is a new topic, but those of us who know and believe in all forms of Biblical marriage. this is not new at all. Its easy to lose sight and patients and forget that each convo is a new one, and you can’t expect babies to eat meat. You have to treat them with love and care and feed them milk..

            Bob have you ever really studied this? Have you ever really studied plural marriage in the Bible? I truly believe if you do and are honest with yourself, like so many others, you would arrive at the same conclusion. The Creator spoken of in scripture had nothing evil to say about a man taking plural wives. In fact, there is far far more in scripture that could be used to promote the idea of Gods perfect will as celibacy then there is He was against Biblical polygamy also called polygyny.

          • Idaho Bob

            FC, thanks for the reply. You asked “Have you ever really studied plural marriage in the bible?” Yes I have, while there are examples of plural marriage given, a person would be remiss not to see that everyone of the examples is filled with the negative consequences of being outside of God’s will. God created man and woman, singular, to be together for life. God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve’s. Jesus Confirmed this when He stated, “And He answered ans said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh? (Matthew 19:4-5)

            God’s original design, from the beginning, was for one man to be with one woman. As with all sin, men and women, including those mentioned in the bible, have perverted God’s design and gone outside of His will. God never condones plural marriage, instead God used this sin to teach us that when we go our own way there are consequences that will be paid.

            It is evident that God does not approve of plural marriage based on the negative consequences alone. The woman were jealous of one another, the were bitter toward one another, they plotted against each other, and the man always picked a favorite which fueled the fires of anger, jealousy, bitterness, rage, etc… The children were always harmed as well. They were pitted against one another, used by the different women for personal gain and chided because their mother wasn’t the favored mother. Funny thing, non of this has changed. The same actions as above are the results that are seen today in the lives of those who practice plural marriage.

            The bottom line is that it is total nonsense to attempt to use the bible to justify a lifestyle that is outside of God’s design and will. Honest and thoughtful study of God’s Word shows that while God allowed plural marriages to take place He never approved of, nor condoned such unions. The opposite was in fact God’s response to these actions. His judgment was to allow them to hurt themselves through the natural consequences.

          • FC

            2 Samuel 12:8
            “And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.”

            This isn’t Him approving or condoning such unions? Are you suggesting God sinned here in giving David multiple wives?

            Is it also evident that God does not approve of mono marriage because of the negative consequences of that 1st union between Adam and Eve?

            “God’s original design, from the beginning, was for one man to be with one woman”

            That’s not really the truth now is it… God first created Adam alone. It was a need/desire in Adam that lead to Him creating Eve. So with that reasoning, wouldn’t it rightfully be said, “God’s original design, from the beginning, was for man to be alone?”

            Your argument is that God allowed this “sin” because man wanted/desired it? Yet the same God didn’t “allow” any other sins because man wanted it, He didn’t allow sodomy and He surely didn’t give a man a man to partner with because he wanted/desired it. So why to you believe he was so wishy washy on this one? Why would he call one man a great man, a man after His own heart who was a polygamist, and then tell another man he is sinning because he is a polygamist?

          • Idaho Bob

            You miss the whole point about David being a man after God’s own heart. David was an adulterous, murdering, conniving, lying, polygamist at heart. This is not what endeared him to God. It was in spite of these things that God used David who understood that he was a sinner in need of God’s grace and mercy. Follow David through the Psalms and you will see a contrite and broken man who is tormented continuously by his enemies. Just as God told him it would be because of his sin. David learned complete reliance on God because he repented and put his trust fully in the work of his Lord and Savior. If you for one minute believe that God gave him these as some kind of a gift or approval you have sadly missed all of the devastation that followed. Your line of reasoning, though, fits perfectly with that of your father the devil. His tactic is always the same as yours, to cast doubt upon, to disparage, and to be cunning in the use of God’s Word. You may be deceived, but there is hope for you if you will only repent (turn from your sin and turn to God’s will), confess your sin (tell God that you are a sinner), and receive Jesus Christ (be born-again, changed from the old nature into the new nature that only comes through the saving grace of Jesus Christ).

          • FC

            I never said David was perfect, He committed adultery by sleeping with another mans wife.. Yet polygamy wasn’t one of his faults. After all, God Himself said He GAVE David his masters wives. Are you really telling me, you believe God gave him those wives and then had an issue with him having them?

          • FreeandClear

            And look what a mess polygny caused in biblical times! If you want reasons why NOT to live it, just read your bible.

        • tcidda

          Can not anyone claim to be a prophet/

          • Idaho Bob

            Actually, no.

            “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they (Hebrews 1:1-4)”.

            God used prophets before Christ, but when Christ came He brought the final Word of God. Anyone who claims to be a prophet speaking for God, is today a false prophet. There is still prophecy that takes place, but it differs form the the office of prophet. A prophet both spoke for God and foretold what God was going to do. Today, the prophecy that we have is not foretelling, rather it is forth-telling. It’s the explanation of what God has said, so instead of speaking for God we speak about God.

            To further demonstrate this Peter says about the Old Testament prophets, “knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21)”.

            Private interpretation means that no portion of the Scripture is to be interpreted apart from other references to the same subject. In other words, when someone claiming to be a prophet says something like “I have a new revelation” or “God has revealed His secrets to me”, or any other such statement go the other way quickly. This person is a false prophet.

          • tcidda

            yadda,yadda,yadda

    • Idaho Bob

      That’s not completely accurate. Outside of the US both mainstream and fundamental LDS practice plural marriage. This is a fairly well documented fact. Take the time to do a little bit of research and you will find out for yourself.

      • tcidda

        WHY do we care about outside the USA?

    • FC

      If the founders of the LDS church were alive today, what church would they be in? So are we to believe the church who would excommunicate the founders of the church is the real church? That’s funny. If the “Christian” church no longer taught what Jesus said and in fact Jesus Himself would be excommunicated by that church if he were a member today, That would still be known as the Christian church and not the smaller branches that broke off of it that still taught Christs teachings?

  • Utahlady

    Yep…and then there is the guy in Florida who was arrested for messin’ with his donkey and has claimed he wants to marry her.” Her” is his donkey and that he loves her and it is his right and his business. Sound familiar? Don’t forget about Muslims who many are polygamist and guess who gets to pay for all these kids .Polygamist women in Utah forget who baby daddy is and we get to pay for children from wife number two forward.
    I am assuming there is more to come.
    Oh what a tangled web we weave!!!!!!!!

    • knuckledragginrightwingnutjob

      Animal ‘Lovers” (aka zoophiles) are already using a “born this way” defense….so are pedophiles.

      Source: Google “German zoophiles” and then read http://gawker.com/5941037/born-this-way-sympathy-and-science-for-those-who–want-to-have-sex-with-children

    • Robert Hutton

      They do NOT forget who baby daddy is you dope.
      But those excommunicate POLYGYNISTS are as entitled to child assistance from the state as are the Baby Mommies in my street.

      POLYGYNY, go study it and Compare it to the HOUSE of ISRAEL, GOD’S CHOSEN PEOPLE.

      • Utahlady

        Robert,
        I do not think the government should force any of us to care for another’s illegitimate child, not in your neighborhood or mine. That just encourages this kind of behavior, which is not good for the child or society. Now my religion teaches me to care for those in need, not to create them.
        You sound like you are full of anger. If you are a religious person ,see your clergy for advice ,if you are not religious I suggest you seek professional help. Calling someone a dope because they follow their conscience is not the sign of a stable person.

        • tcidda

          i agree but to stop it you have to change the laws and that wouldn’t be POLITICALLY CORRECT.

    • FC

      How would one go about proving the Donkey gave consent? We are talking about consent from both parties who are of age.

      • Utahlady

        Honestly FC,I just do not have an answer for that one ,but I bet someone in DC or a judge somewhere could come up with your answer. Hoping to avoid it , but I am sure we will have to deal with this. God bless the Donkey!

        • FC

          Well for what its worth, I also don’t believe mankind should be marring beasts. The jump from consenting adults to people marring animals is bigger then the grand cannon. Its not even the same convo.

          I believe sodomy is wrong. Not just because I believe the Bible but because it goes against nature. If that became the norm, mankind as we know it would naturally die off. Biblical Polygamy is not the same as that, we not only see it in Scripture as being just as normal as monogamy, but we see it in nature as well.

          Why are Christians attacking marriage, instead of attacking all those out sleeping around outside of marriage? How many people are virgins when they get married now days? How many partners does the average person have before getting married? Scripture clearly speaks against sexual relations outside of marriage, yet no one says anything about it. If that same man married those women instead of sleeping with and moving on, people start comparing that to sleeping with animals? Seriously? They do that, all the while there is no clear scripture against a man marring multiple women. Still he is condemned while the man not marring anyone and sleeping with as many as will let him. gets called a brother because he sits beside them in church and is condemning the man who believes in marriage along side of them.

          • Utahlady

            I am not sure rather I should laugh or cry at this response. However it is indeed part of a picture that I deal with on a daily basis in my work.
            God bless human beings, for we all struggle daily learning how to be decent people and follow rules given to us by a varied group of imperfect people. Add to that the struggle to interpret the Bible or Koran. Interpretations of what some ,including myself, try to include ancient ways into todays life. Pretty much why I personally try to stick to the Ten Commandments. Men in all society’s and all times are on the prowl for women, with or without marriage as you stated. Women, everywhere are aware of this and use it accordingly to fulfill their own needs. So while you are using us, so we use you.
            Polygamists have just perfected it, some congratulate you for what some see as a great accomplishment. Not me.
            For you see God did give us free will, to grow and use our brains as well as out bodies to find fulfillment in life.
            Many men struggle with macho images and expectations society thrusts upon them that appear to be weighing them down, and women have needs other than pleasing men.
            The weak bond together to meet their needs, the stronger of the human species move on and up the ladder of evolution, and learn how to care for themselves and enjoy human interactions. Some loose their spirituality in this quest and this is a shame.
            The goal is to reach full spirituality and human accomplishment. Few of us ever do ,but I have met some truly wonderful people who are way ahead most of us.
            Unfortunately Polygamy does not even try to accomplish this goal for either sex.

          • FC

            Thank you for the thought out response, I agree that we all must find our place and try to grow into being all that we can be. I respect your opinion, and I believe you have to decide what is best for you based upon where you want to go. I believe finding ways to work with people is helpful in all areas of life. Even those that choose to remain single, need to be able to work with others, even to be able to have a conversation on a message board. Polygamy has a lot to offer in that regards, but for me its about a lot more then that. I don’t believe I will get a higher place in heaven based on the number of wives I have. But I do believe it is in everyone’s best interest to try and help people.

            Like most other polygamists I know, (outside of the groups) it is not their intent to get others to be polygamists.But they want the right to be that if they choose without being labeled something they are not. When I was single and hung out with single guys, it didn’t take very long to see what their main motivation was in regards to women. I spent a lot of time shaking my head and trying to explain to them why their way of thinking wasn’t healthy. once mono married and hanging with other mono married men, I found their motivations were better but there was still some of the single guy mentality there.. After talking to men with plural wives, it was easy to see their maturity level. Of the three, polygamist men give the highest testimony of women and have more respect for women.

            Now we both know this isn’t true for all men who have plural wives. But this idea that as a whole they must somehow value women less is simply not true. I also want to say, the true polymamist men are tougher on those doing it for the wrong reasons then those not living it are, because of their views on women, marriage, commitment and responsibility. So don’t think we will defend them just because they want plural wives. We will be right there in agreement with why this or that is wrong on most things. so why not judge each person on their own instead of trying to force them into a group and attaching all the stereotypes to them? The same goes for the wives, they are being looked down on because of all the pity people have for them. Because of that, many choose to keep that part of their life a secret to avoid all the negativity. They grow bitter and can start down the road to isolationism in how they view the world and those around them. That part isn’t healthy for the growth of a person, but it is a product of how they are viewed for the choices they have made, far more then because they are polygamists.

          • Utahlady

            With all due respect ,if you were not happy single, and not happy in marriage with a single wife, if polygamy does not provide you with the peace or fulfillment you seem to be searching for. Where will you go?
            Polygamist women as a group ,and I do realize there are differences in each due to natural and environmental surrounding and upbringings, start out as immature with a need for group or any kind of approval. When they find that their individual needs are not being fulfilled,( sometimes they are not even aware these needs existed), it is not unusual for them to divert to isolationism. This happens to other women who were not allowed or did not learn to appreciate their worth also.
            In some cases ,and I believe that you do not, not value the women you live with, but what is the drive for two wives ,or more rather than the relationship you describe,only with one woman? My Church encouraged the birth of many children ,early in it’s history, in order to grow. Not so much now. I believe the LDS Church, byo it’s leaders encouraged not only many children but many wives also for the same reason. I have met some of these very confused children. Many fight desperately to understand and are in such dire need emotionally. Not much different than children born into homes whereby they really were not wanted.
            I always wish the best for everyone trying to find their way, for I am a believer that God will sort it all out in his way.
            I only wish more could find a better way on earth.

          • FC

            I didn’t say I wasn’t happy single or mono married. I believe happiness comes from within, we must be happy with ourselves and not search for happiness from the outside or we will end up living our life trying to please others and doom ourselves to an unhappy life.

            I did however see marriage as an improvement to me and who I wanted to be, I also felt I could be an asset to another and together we could grow as one. The same reasons for going from being single to monogamy, was going from monogamy to polygamy. Looking back, I will say I am happier now then I was when I was single. But that is based on my level of understanding now compared to then, and the value I put on that understanding. Most will say they were happiest when they were a young child, because they had fewer cares and less responsibility. Which is where I believe the saying “ignorance is bliss” comes from. But is that true happiness? Or is it just a lack of knowing anything else? Does the answer to that even matter? It is cruel to bring a new understanding to someone if the motivation behind bringing that new understanding, comes from a desire to make them unhappy. In that we can accept, what makes one happy may not make another happy. As long as there is mutual respect given in that regards, there will be a foundation from which we all can grow.

  • cvr527

    Next it’s going to be 1st cousins, then parents and their children, after all the only thing that matters is that they LOVE each other. In 20yrs we wont even recognize this country.

    • Utahlady

      Do you think we have 20 years?

      • tcidda

        20 years from now hopefully i’ll be looking down from above shaking my head.

        • Utahlady

          Me too!!!!!! :)

    • FC

      That is not polygamy, Many loves or lovers is polyamory, multiple spouses is polygamy. Polygamists believe in marriage, because of this, they are at odds with the polyamorous because their relationships are not built around marriage. The difference is like single people sleeping around with multiple partners, They are in fact polyamorous because they have multiple lovers. and those who believe sexual relations are meant for marriage and should not be shared outside of marriage. That is the view of polygamists. If they didn’t hold that view, they wouldn’t get married to their wives, instead they would just sleep with them all and not take responsibility for them. Pretty much exactly like most single people

      • cvr527

        This article is about polygamy. My comment is about what is next after polygamy. Once the definition of marriage is legally changed and the deciding criteria becomes “love” then everything is fair game.

        • FC

          Is your fear that maybe laws will be passed that force you to be a polygamist? Do you think the State should be in your bedroom telling you what you can and can’t do? Who should get to decide what is acceptable for us? the individual (ourselves) or the State?

          • cvr527

            Wow you sure read alot into my comment. Quite obviously you put zero thought into what I said, perhaps if you were not hypersensitive to polygamy you would not read into comments.

          • FC

            If you were not including polygamy into what you feel as another bad step in the direction of the destruction of family and marriage then yes, it appears I misread your comment. Truth is, we have more to fear from people teaching its a good thing to experiment before marriage then we do from polygamy. Polygamists believe in marriage, they believe in family. They believe sexual relations should be inside the marriage. There are those who don’t value those things and they may try to justify what they do as polygamy. But if they don’t value those things, they aren’t polygamists. Forcing someone to marry you and be a plural wife is not polygamy marriage, no more then forcing someone to marry you and be your only wife is real monogamy marriage.

  • tcidda

    Next to Polygamy Gay marriage is at least tolerable.however i suggest you Polys and you Gays found a new country on some remote island and call it GAP ISLAND WHERE YOUR KINDS CAN LIVE IN PEACE.

    • bobmigs

      Polygamy was practiced by the Patriarchs gay marriage was not.

      • Robert Hutton

        POLYGYNY WAS HANDED DOWN BY GOD, or the Jews would never have qualified as God’s chosen people.

      • tcidda

        and your point is what?it’s still abhorent.

        • bobmigs

          My point is that polygamy is still the union of a man and a woman The child can point to one mom and one dad. When
          you have multiple fathers than you have confusion and chaos.

          • tcidda

            it’s plural marriage.that means one man more than one wife.

          • vickyprunty

            Most of the time the Dad is not around to point at.

      • vickyprunty

        It doesn’t mean “patriarchs” are infallible, and it doesn’t mean humans are incapable of evolving into a higher level of consciousness. Maybe we should go back to slavery and allowing husbands to beat their wives like in the days of the Old Testament.

    • FC

      Our kind? Come on lol.. You really need to stop fearing the monsters in the closet that you know nothing about. You want to know what polygamy is? Have you ever met someone that was married? now imagine there is two of those. Its as simple as that. People don’t grow horns and sneak around in the shadows when they get married lol

      • tcidda

        I know enough to know i don’t like it and in my view it is wrong.YOUR KIND!!!!!THE ABHORENT ONES.

        • FC

          Please keep it up, there is two sides of the polygamy rights issue, You are representing your side with some serious class! If we could just get you in a video interview defending the no rights side, we would have hoards of people rushing over to the other side! ;)

          • tcidda

            don’t think so

  • Laura Laird

    WOW! Talk about deception! To actually say this would be the free choice of ANY woman… It’s insane! Also he might wanna read 1 Corinthians 7:2 before he makes claims about polygamy being acceptable in the bible. In the old testament it was more like a culture issue anyway than God given consent…

    • Robert Hutton

      POLYGYNY. I really do love to correct those who lay that charge on the Court Tables. And God did not hand it down and accept it with Jacob/Israel, he repeated it through LIVING PROPHETS. He also repeats it to ALL whop have faith to seek his answer by REVELATION.

      • DMG

        I am a republican conservative right wing believer in a real god that
        doesn’t play with sin in any way like the bible, koran and torah god.

    • FC

      Are you talking about the same God who gave David multiple wives?
      2 Samuel 12:8

      “And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy
      bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had
      been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such
      things.”

      At the time God gave David his masters WIVES, David was already
      married to more then one wife. Are we seriously to believe God thought
      this was adultery and forced David to commit adultery by giving him
      plural wives?
      No where in scripture is taking multiple wives called adultery,
      Scripture
      does not say David was committing adultery in having multiple wives, it
      does however say he committed adultery when he slept with the wife of
      another man. So unless people are trying to say the Creator is a
      complete hypocrite, its pretty easy to conclude what adultery is.

      Further, Scripture gives the same title to plural wives as was given
      to Eve. Their relationship to the husband was seen exactly the same as
      the relationship mono wives had to a husband.

    • FC

      1st Corinthians 7:1-6
      1.Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

      2.Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

      3.Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

      4.The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

      5. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be
      with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and
      prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your
      incontinency.

      6. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

      They asked Paul if it was ok to touch a women. His reply was, have your own wife, in other words, don’t touch another mans wife. How and where does that say polygamy/polygyny is sin? You do realize that the same word translated into wife was also translated into wives, it means one or many.

      Further, in 6 he says he speaks this by his permission/opinion and not by Gods commandment. The same as he said his opinion was that men should be as he was and not marry at all. In fact he words it the exact same way there. So should we then believe marriage is a sin or that Pauls opinion was that he wasn’t to marry?

    • tcidda

      AGREE

    • FreeandClear

      You are so right Laura! Take away the belief that you have to live polygamy to please God, and that in fact if you don’t live it he will destroy you – and the number of women agreeing to it would be few to none. legalized polygamy in this country would put women’s rights back centuries.

  • K Dee Ignatin

    As the director of an organization dedicated to educating the public about the inherent abuses found in polygamy I am disturbed, not just by the guest but also by the interviewer who seems to have some terrible misconceptions about polygamy. Polygamy has never benefitted any society. I have more than 200 empirical research studies conducted, worldwide, which show polygamy demonstrably harms women children and society as a whole. The interviewer even went so far as to agree with the guest that the bible does not prohibit polygamy. Well, it does not prohibit slavery either! I think we can all agree that just because G-d did not prohibit something, and regulated the behavior, does not mean it had his stamp of approval. Divorce? Regulated. Slavery? Regulated. Polygamy? Regulated. Even the ancient Romans, who were certainly not what we would consider the pillars of “morality,” knew that monogamous marriage between one man and one woman was the bedrock for a strong and successful civilization.

    • tcidda

      all we’re talking about is the wisdom or non wisdom of having many wives.i think it is an absurd lifestyle.

      • K Dee Ignatin

        It is a”lifestyle.” Who in their right mind would call slavery a “lifestyle?” Yet millions of women and children across the world are trapped within polygamy and suffer its abuses, and here in the west, suddenly, it’s a “lifestyle.” More than 80% of the world’s most impoverished and war ravaged nations allow polygamy. I don’t think that’s a coincidence. I think when you allow the abuse of women and children en mass you get societal chaos. Gee, I wonder who could benefit from societal chaos here in America?

        • FC

          Your right it isn’t a lifestyle. Its marriage. Your using all the elements that are wrong with the cults to define polygamy. If you subtract polygamy from those cults and they were monogamists. Would that make monogamy everything you say polygamy is? I mean is it ok for any man to give a young girl over to an older single man so he can molest her?

          All the polygamist I know are against the exact same things happening in those cults as your are. No one is promoting that, We are promoting marriage for consenting adults.

          You want to hold onto the view that polygamy is only happening in secret groups on compounds, the reality is, that is not true! Most polygamist are so normal you wouldn’t even know they were polygamist. They are all over, they are going to many of the churches you attend, You are passing them in the street without even knowing about it. There are far more polygamists then you know about.

          • K Dee Ignatin

            Here’s what I know about you, FC, right off the bat. You’re an uneducated man practicing a felony. You emotionally manipulate others using religion. You are also no follower of Christ. I know a lot of Christians, and they tend to follow the teachings of Jesus and his disciples, rather than cherry picking behaviors from biblical history that titillate both their flesh and their burning desire to dominate and manipulate others.

            Which groups that I don’t know about are you referring to? The mainstream LDS, FLDS, AUB, Kingstons, Allreds, Centennial Park, Hawkins’ followers in Texas, Muslim Americans, Independents, Reverend Deese’s minions, Tony Alamo’s, the so-called “Messianic” Jews, Biblical Families?

            Believe me, I know about you all. I pick up the pieces when the women finally leave, and my tax dollar supports all the children of those “single mothers” on food stamps and Medicaid.
            There is no comparing polygamy to monogamy, because the studies have already done it. Science proves that polygamy is abusive. The rates of poverty, child “brides,” molestation, restriction in dress, education and travel for women, elevated chronic depression and other pathologies in women, lower test scores for children, conflict among siblings and concubines, and higher infant mortality rates all show it.

          • FC

            “Which groups that I don’t know about are you referring to?”
            There you go again trying to force everyone into a group. That is the problem with your thinking on this subject, More then half the reasons your faulting polygamy and stereotyping all who practice, come from the being apart of a group and not being able to think for themselves. There are independent polygamists of all faiths. There would be more and they would be even more in the open if they weren’t treated as they are. If that were the case, there would be more oversight in to what is happening.

            How many of those people end up joining those groups because they have no where else to go? When the only option is separating from your family, being ridiculed and run down or joining the groups, its easy to understand why so many do join them. You might not like it, but many women do want to be a plural wive, why should they not have that right?

            You make it sound like all polygamist wives are trapped! lol.. How many mono wives stay in unhealthy relationships because of their beliefs or because those around them will look down on them if they get out? Are we to look at those cases and assume every married women feels trapped in her marriage?

            Maybe your view is warped because you only work with those in bad situations? If a person hangs at the hospital all the time, how long until they come to the conclusion everyone is ill? I have met and talked with plenty of happy polygamist wives. If your seriously trying to say there are none, then your either clueless or severally biased. Either way, the picture you paint is not accurate, you can’t paint everyone with the same brush and call them the same color.

          • FreeandClear

            Hmm all these “happy” polygamist wives! From personal experience, putting on a happy face about polygamy is for many women a matter of loyalty – to their husband, family, religious leaders, and to a god they believe requires this way of life. Too often the happy smile is hiding a great deal of pain.

          • vickyprunty

            Come on….you know as well as every polygamist out there, no matter if they are part of a group or not, every wife goes through pain (aka jealousy) when sharing their husband. How can you feel good about yourself, and your family, knowing you are putting your wives through this type of emotion. Or knowing that your wives will have to work that much harder at parenting because you are spending time with another wife. Gays want everything that heterosexual monogamists have in marriage, not what polygamists don’t have.

          • FC

            I have never met anyone in a relationship of any kind that didn’t have jealousy to work through.. Polygamy is no different. Are you suggesting the polygamist males aren’t jealous or have to deal with jealousy?

            “Gays want everything that heterosexual monogamists have in marriage, not what polygamists don’t have.”

            Obviously you feel every gay person is the same exact person with the same needs and desires/motivations, which is why your taking their individuality away and forcing them all into one group with your blanketed statement. How would you know what “they” (Beings you feel they aren’t individuals at all but instead should just be recognized for being gay) want? And what gives you the right to speak for every polygamist, let alone every gay?

          • vickyprunty

            Do you really think I, or anyone else, is so lame that we can’t determine that it is wives who experience more jealousy in polygamy than the polygamist who is receiving additional wives–yes, additional intimate partners, future mothers, and more children. Being shortchanged, or being given your time slot to a newbie is a little different than what you experience as an exclusive.

            Gays who want legalized marriages are only wanting the same rights as heterosexual marriages–don’t twist my words.

          • FC

            Polygamists aren’t even fighting for the rights to marry, they are fighting not to be targeted because they are married..

          • vickyprunty

            You’re right most polygamists are a law unto themselves, they do not want legalization because they would be made more accountable for their wives and offspring.

          • FC

            There was a time when people believed marriage was between the parties and their God. Now days some are foolish enough to believe a person isn’t even married if the state hasn’t given permission. Most polygamists have a better understanding of what marriage is and so their is no need to ask the state for permission to do something they can give themselves permission to do.

          • vickyprunty

            So are you suggesting there should be no laws? What about the polygamists who believe they are following God when they practice incest to keep their bloodlines pure, or the polygamists who practice female mutilation or genocide because it is what their God dictates. Since society doesn’t have a god radar indicating which religion is true or not, it make perfect sense (to me) that there are certain non-biased societal laws that protect children from people who believe they are following God. Let’s face it, the public doesn’t care about consensual sex among adults. I probably agree with many of your frustrations about the government, and it’s laws, including marriage laws, but every country has a marriage law, and no government, or country is perfect. However, I believe we have evolved since the old testament. Those days are gone.

          • FC

            No laws? No I don’t believe that at all. The simple fact is child abuse is child abuse, there is and should be a law against that. does it matter if the adult is married or single? what does marriage have to do with that, we are talking about consenting adults here. not rather an adult should be able to molest a child.

            If someone is forced to marry or taken captive, their liberty is being taken away, their should be laws against that as well, again, that is not a marriage issue.

            We should be free to live our faith, but that liberty does not give us the right to take others liberties away. Governments of men are established to protect the liberties of everyone.

            That is the problem, all these other issues are being tied to polygamy/polygyny. When we say, we should not be targeted for who we marry and is of age who also wants to marry us, we are not saying we should have the right to molest children or force others to marry us. Those are separate issues and the laws against those things are not even a marriage issue. Those things are wrong rather the person doing it wants to “marry” their victims or not.

          • vickyprunty

            Exactly. There is no argument polygyny in itself is inherently abusive thus saith the Canadian & U.S. Supreme Court.

          • FC

            ” There is no argument polygyny in itself is inherently abusive”

            Yet we are talking about polygamy/polygyny here and you keep throwing out all these other issues as if that is polygamy. If you don’t believe polygyny is inherently abusive, why would you not just say. I don’t have a problem with polygyny, I have issues with child abuse and women being held captive. Upon saying that, I would fully agree with you. Instead of doing that, you have constantly tried to turn the polygamy issue into child abuse and other crimes against liberty. So much so, you see them as the same issue, as if polygyny actually means child abuse and holding women captive.

          • vickyprunty

            I do believe that polygyny is inherently abusive.

          • FC

            It is no more abusive then marriage in general is. A women who feel marriage takes away her freedom should not get married. Women who welcome a life lived with those she loves and wants to be with, should in fact consider joining them in marriage so she will be able to live the life she wants to live with those she want to live it with.

          • vickyprunty

            FC, I hope you and your loved ones many happy days ahead and that you do not have to encounter the negative fallout of polygamy.

          • FC

            So how about we focus on stopping child abuse in whatever situation it happens and stop targeting people who are none related consenting adults, who of their own mind and good conscious want to be polygynist?

          • vickyprunty

            I agree we should prevent/stop child abuse whenever we can. I also believe we should prevent/stop polygyny when possible. I disagree with you when it comes to the mass majority of polygyny being consensual.

          • FC

            Where did I say the mass majority of polygyny was consensual? I said that is what we are talking about, not rather young girls should be forced to marry anyone.

            You said, “There is no argument polygyny in itself is inherently abusive” then polygyny is not the problem. its the other things that are the problem. Lets focus on stopping the things that are the problem instead of going after something that is not.

          • vickyprunty

            I agree more prevention should be done to stop child-brides, and abuses in polygyny, but I DO NOT believe legalizing polygamy will help because I believe polygyny itself is inherently abusive (as court cases have already determined), no matter what religion or tradition. No arguing here…best.

          • FC

            In many polygamist marriages, the wives do in fact also gain additional intimate partners. Even when that additional intimacy isn’t in the bedroom, are you telling me husbands aren’t ever jealous of their wives friends or family? Knowing without a doubt that many are, a polygynist husband can be just as jealous about the relationship between the Sister Wives. Jealousy is and never will be a one sided street in any consenting relationship structure

          • vickyprunty

            Yes, you can have an intimate relationship with a pet, too, but it’s not at the same level as a marriage partnership. The jealousy would not be the same either, but you couldn’t possibly understand that.

          • FC

            again with all this same or equal nonsense. With what scale could it possibly be measured?

            I have seen marriages end because the husband or wife was jealous of the relationship their spouse had with their family. Same thing with friends, how many spouses have said, if you don’t stop seeing them, we are done? Children get jealous of their siblings relationship with the parents. Who gets to say one form of jealousy is worse then another? Each person who is jealous, regardless the reason feels their feelings are justified and they act on those feelings the same way..

          • vickyprunty

            I understand human emotions, yet these types of jealousies are not comparable to a man taking another wife. And, there is much more than jealousy that occurs in polygyny, such as the husband becoming a scare commodity for the first family, especially if he is busy recruiting other wives.

          • FC

            If both can and have ended marriages, they are comparable by anyone’s scale, especially to those ending the marriages over it.

            As for the rest I agree. polygyny doesn’t give husbands the right to be bad fathers or bad husbands. Remember, we are talking about polygyny with the wife/wives blessing here, if the wife/wives feel taking another is going to spread the husband to thin and they couldn’t make it work, then they wouldn’t give their blessing. And a good husband wouldn’t want to take more then would allow him to be a good husband and father.

          • vickyprunty

            The majority of women who give their consent in polygyny do so because they have been taught from an early age that it is required in order to attain the highest degree of heaven, and they will lose their eternal family if they do not comply. Similar cultural tactics are used elsewhere when women do not have equal rights. Consent through coercion or due to duress should not be considered consent, or giving one’s blessing. Being uneducated, and not understanding options, is another way of keeping a female enslaved. Do you want that for your daughters?

          • FC

            Your talking of those on the compounds obviously. People do all sorts of things for their faith, they even marry people they don’t want to because of it. How many have married because the girl ended up pregnant and there was pressure from those around them to do it?

            A persons belief and what they have been taught figures into everything they do. That happens with all people regardless their faith. Are all the people who donate their money to a church because they believe they are supposed to victims because they were taught that to be true and then believe it to be true? Some take vows to deny themselves of their sexual desires and never be with anyone because they believe that is a higher calling. They do that because they have been taught and believe that to be true, are they victims? When that same person ends up molesting a child because of those desires, do we see them as victims or say they should be held accountable for their actions?

            How many men on those compounds also believe what they have been taught? Are not they polygynists because they have been taught and believe that to be true? Just like the women, they are following what they believe, if one is “brainwashed” so is the other, if one is a victim of their circumstance, so is the other.

            I am not FLDS and I don’t believe what they do, but they have the right to believe and practice their faith if that’s what they choose to do. as long as children aren’t being abused and have the freedom to walk away making their own choices if they don’t choose to walk in that faith.

            Being the laws are against polygyny, how many families stay on those compounds because they don’t feel they have any where else to go? How many would say, this “prophet’ is nuts and I’m out of here if they could do that and keep their family in tact? If polygamy/polygyny were decriminalized, they would in fact have that option. They wouldn’t need to search for a community to accept them because all communities would be an option.

          • vickyprunty

            I never lived on a compound. I was an independent plural wives. Some of the independents are worse than those in the compound. (Not to say that you are). I am simply against male privilege, mind control, and making deviance a lifestyle.

          • FC

            I’m not a Mormon at all, I’m a Christian. God forbid that taking a wive into His Holy Union of marriage is ever seen as a deviant lifestyle.

            You were able to exercise your choice in getting out of the marriage it seems.

          • vickyprunty

            Deviance as in unlawful.
            Yes, I got out, but not soon enough.
            Wishing you & your family well.

          • FC

            So what are your thoughts on the marriages were the wives are also sexually intimate? I suppose you feel the wives in those relationships have “more” right to be jealous as well?

          • vickyprunty

            Are you talking about polyamory or polygyny where the polygamist allows his wives to have sex with each other? There is a difference. Personally, I believe a married couple should find what is right for them within the law; they have to deal with their own jealousies, and decide what is best for their relationship. I’m sure many spouses of celebrities, professional athletes, porn stars, open relationships, etc.. deal with these jealousies all the time, but at the end of the day the decision is left to the significant couple. Having experienced all types of relationships, and having been both a first and third plural wife, I can honestly say that jealousies in polygyny are akin to the emotions of adultery, or cheating on one’s spouse.

          • FC

            So your saying what here?

            ” Personally, I believe a married couple should find what is right for
            them within the law; they have to deal with their own jealousies, and
            decide what is best for their relationship.”

            Open marriages where either the husband, wife or both sleep with others outside of the marriage is ok and are up to each couple to decide what is best for their relationship? Yet this doesn’t apply to a couple who both agree to polygyny?

            And if a couple decides to have an open relationship where just the husband wants to sleep with others and the wife agrees to this, this is ok but if the wife agrees to the husband taking another wife, that is unacceptable? WOW! Its ok to sleep with multiple people and use them for sex if the wife accepts it, you just can’t commit and love them rather your wife accepts it or not. lol

          • vickyprunty

            I don’t think forgetting about what polygyny does to children is funny, which children you seem to continually neglect in defending your position. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is their own business, but when children are involved it changes things. Open marriages do not generally mean having children with additional wives, or additional husbands. Again, laws are made for the best of society, and there may be exceptions to the rule; some race car drivers can drive over 100 mph extremely well along the freeway, and some users of cocaine or heroine function very well, although these things continue to still be illegal. I didn’t make the law against polygamy, yet from all my experiences, education, and research I think polygamy (unlike gay marriage) should remain illegal.

          • FC

            You mean the children that wouldn’t be born? Are you suggesting that if we really care about them, we will keep them from existing?

            Many people die in car accidents, your right, not all are good drivers. so should we make it against the law to drive because of those who aren’t very good at it? Should we also round up the guns, taking them from the good because some use them to hurt people?

          • vickyprunty

            I know of many polygamists that would take in mothers and their daughters too, like prosecuted Tom Green, who married some of his step-daughters as plural wives.

            I’m not going to argue with you. People can have guns, people can drive, people can have children–but it’s not a free for all. There are laws in society, and laws within laws, and if individuals decide to ignore the laws, and go in a different direction, they have that right.

            We have our differences of opinion, and I respect your views. Once upon a time, I probably believed and practiced many of your views but am much happier outside of a fundamentalist religion that taught “celestial marriage” and much happier w/o the alternative type of polygamy I once lived outside of religion.

            I will still voice my opinions because I do not believe anymore that it is healthy to be an island unto myself (or family). Nor do I believe it is possible. I see all people as my brothers and sisters, regardless of their skin color or sexual preference. Still, I am grateful for the imperfect laws of the land that afford us a little freedom, and some needed safety and protection (including the inequality of male privilege).

            What gays seems to understand that polygamists don’t: It’s better to do a good deed than to spread your seed.

          • FC

            Also, polygamy is a person with multiple spouses. Polyamory is a person with multiple loves or lovers. If a man has multiple spouses, he is a polygynist man. If he has one spouse and multiple lovers, he is polyamorous.

            The difference between polygamy and polyamory is in the commitment between those in the marriage, and is not defined in the actions themselves

          • Blair

            “Gays who want legalized marriages are only wanting the same rights as heterosexual marriages–don’t twist my words.”
            He’s not twisting your words, he’s pointing out the slippery slope that you are trying to remain oblivious to. If you redefine marriage, you then open up that definition to include just about every type of sexual expression out there. You can’t legally or logically do otherwise and that is a major part of the problem.

            I would also point out the complete hypocrisy of your position: you support legalized gay unions – a relationship based on self-indulgence and selfishness – yet decry polygamy by claiming it is self-indulgent and selfish?!? You might want to rethink that.

          • vickyprunty

            There is no slippery slope. Comparing gay marriage to polygamy is like comparing apples to broccoli. Gay marriages are a partnership of two individuals; whereas, polygamy is based on “one” person having the exclusive right to marry multiple individuals. That is hardly comparable!

            You mention gay unions are “self-indulgent and selfish,” yet gay unions are not procreating dozens of children, marrying young brides or grooms, using God to justify their actions, gathering harems to increase their manliness, creating an unequal distribution of power in the marriage, or using the welfare system to support their lifestyle.

            Gay marriage partners want the same rights for their partner, as they have for themselves. In polygyny husbands do not want the same rights for their wives, as they have for themselves.

          • Blair

            I didn’t make the comparison, I pointed out that you were using the same mentality to justify gay “marriage” only to turn around and use the exact same behavior to criticize polygamy. It’s a double-standard and not one I am alone in pointing out. These very arguments were put before the Federal courts in arguing Proposition 8 in California and the gay rights proponents agreed that legally, it would be impossible to allow gay marriage rights and simultaneously deny voluntary polygamy.

            I would further point out that you continue to maintain that ALL polygamous marriages happen without choice. That is simply not true. I have already agreed that a marriage without choice – polygamous or otherwise is wrong. But you also need to concede that your fundamental argument is overly broad.

            Now regarding homosexual “marriage” – it is entirely selfish in nature. I say that because the activists such as yourself insist on changing the definition of traditional marriage that has existed for thousands of years to suit your need for acceptance. You claim that it is intolerant of those who do not believe the same as you, yet insist that government and religion alike recognize homosexual unions as equivalent to traditional marriage! Is that not selfishness incarnate? You deny your conscience telling you something is wrong, so you seek to assuage those warnings by external approbation. Traditional marriage proponents know that marriage isn’t defined by man, but by God. You disavow God and so your only source of lawmaking is government and the courts, and in order to do that, you mislead people into thinking that a homosexual relationship is equivalent to a heterosexual one. I agree with you that a homosexual union and a heterosexual union are completely different, because a heterosexual union is complementary – man and woman were made to go together. That is simply not true about a homosexual union – either physically, spiritually or logically.

            I could point out to the myriad studies about the results of homosexuality: that homosexual men are 37x more likely to contract HIV, more than 50% more likely to suffer from depression, significantly more susceptible to various STD’s. I could point to the studies that conclude that homosexuals are significantly more likely to commit suicide than a heterosexual. I could point to the natural anatomy of the human and how homosexuality violates that. I could point out that logically, a union that can not produce progeny violates the basic societal need for self-perpetuation. I could point to the psychological studies that show that heterosexual couples are significantly more likely to have a happy marriage and low stress rates. I could point out that spiritually, every major religion on the planet decries homosexuality as an aberrant behavior. I could do all that and more, but I’ll be ignored because activists like yourself aren’t interested in anything but themselves. If you think that homosexuality isn’t inherently selfish – throwing all these cautions to the wind with reckless abandon – you have only completely proved my point.

          • vickyprunty

            I don’t understand what you are trying to say in your first two paragraphs. I never said that all polygamous marriages are without choice. I agreed with Canada’s Supreme Court decision that all polygyny was “inherently abusive.” There is a difference. Consenting adults make poor decisions (even illegal ones) all the time. In my opinion, that was a poor slippery slope argument.

            As far as describing me as “selfish” and with “reckless abandon”– If I was only interested in the polygamy issue, it may have been easier in the early days of Amendment 8 to be an opponent to gay marriage, and lump these two marriages together, and keep people uneducated. Unlike vocal religious pro-polygamists who went from hating gays and their so-called aberrant sexual desires to suddenly
            advocating for gay marriage rights (as opportunists for their own agenda), I educated about the differences between legalization of gay marriage and polygamy before the
            legalization of gay marriage took place because I view them entirely different. Let’s not mix the two marriages.

            We are all selfish from the first moment we take our first breath–we want to live, be secure, and ultimately find happiness. Is there something wrong with that? Are you proposing that there should be no selfishness during sexual intercourse? No sex without procreation? Should our
            goal be only to altruistically sexually satisfy our partner? What you are suggesting is that sex in a heterosexual marriage and consensual polygyny is more giving, and less
            selfish, than in a gay marriage (now that is a BLANKET STATEMENT). How are gays more selfish than heterosexuals? When you mention traditional marriage how do you fit a man and woman, and woman, and woman… into the traditional marriage definition? Or marriage bed? As far as body parts fitting together, do you want to be the genitalia inspector, and decide whose male and female and who might be different than the norm? Maybe we should start measuring genitalia, too. Or how about resorting to a DNA specialist that decides which gay person is pre-disposed to being gay, and which gay person is not? Should only individuals who are genetically wired and attracted to the same sex be able to legally marry? Although not gay, I embrace the happiness of “two” consenting adults who chose to be married. I also believe Christ would do the same.

            Yes, your research and arguments are ignored.

          • Blair

            Allow me to point out a fundamental behavior which gets at the heart of your argument: choice. In many of the polygamist cultures in today’s society, the women have no say in the man’s decision to take another wife. Without that say, the first wife is completely justified in feeling belittled, neglected, etc. But one must also admit that one can’t make blanket statements about polygamy as a whole when one only looks at those circumstances. No one doubts that the woman in such a position is not being treated as an equal. But when that decision IS hers to make, the circumstances then become entirely different, do they not? You and FC are arguing apples and oranges!

            Again, I’m not justifying polygamy, I’m just pointing out the logical problems with making blanket statements. You are welcome to dislike the practice, but your argument is better served within its boundaries.

          • vickyprunty

            I agree with B.C. Supreme Court decision to uphold Canada’s polygamy laws, and believe that in “polygyny” lends itself to abuse because of the dynamics of m/f inequality, it is “inherently abusive.”

            I worked with polygamous refugees for over ten years, and lived polygamy as both a first wife, and a third wife. I am educated in both Psychology and Sociology, and have studied mind-control.

            FC might be a nice man, as well as Kody Brown, and other polygamists, yet polygamy is illegal for good reason. There is way too much fall out from polygamy. The laws are not a yellow blinking warning sign–it’s a STOP sign. If you want to be educated properly don’t read what I’ve written, read Canada’s decision.

          • Blair

            You mistake a relationship for a behavior. Abuse is abuse and is found in all kinds of relationships. Abuse is centered in selfishness and is usually the result of a person who refuses or is unable to deal with frustration in a positive manner. Any relationship founded on selfishness is going to exhibit the characteristics you describe and isn’t limited to polygamous relationships. It is unfortunately seen in abundance in today’s society among the unmarried and married alike. It should also be noted that law-abiding citizens of the US wouldn’t be engaged in the non-lawful practice of polygamy in the first place, so your generalizations are actually more descriptive of lesser criminals in general. To imply that those practices would be a hallmark of legal polygamy is overly broad and unjustified.

            Also, it should be noted that polygamy was only outlawed in the United States to specifically target the Mormons (LDS) – none of which today practice plural marriage. (Any found doing so are excommunicated.)

            Please note that I am not advocating support for legalization of polygamy and I am certainly advocating for legalization of homosexual unions. I’m just pointing out that you are making overly broad statements that do not exhibit a true causal relationship. If you object to polygamy from a religious standpoint, that’s fine, but don’t try to claim that science definitively shows all polygamous relationships are abusive, as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – among other Biblical figures – directly contradict this erroneous judgement.

          • K Dee Ignatin

            Blair, no I am not confusing the two. I am attempting to explain what science and proven research has to say about polygamy vs. monogamy. There are more than 200 empirical scientific research studies, peer reviewed, which clearly demonstrate that polygamy, just like slavery, is inherently abusive to women and children.
            The UN, which as a conservative I have very little respect for, has even declared polygamy to be abusive of women and children. In the 60 worst countries on earth, more than 80% of them either have legalized polygamy or do not actively prosecute it.
            To make the argument that Americans should be able to practice polygamy because some of the relationships are not abusive is to argue that we should have never abolished slavery in this or any other civilized society, because some slave owners were not abusive. As a matter of fact, there were many slave owners who were so good to their slaves that after the emancipation, their freed slaves refused to leave them. Harriet Tubman, famous for leading the underground railroad said, “I freed a thousand slaves and I could have freed a thousand more, if only they had known they were slaves.”
            80% of Afghan women say they wish polygamy were banned. More than 70% of Muslim first wives say their permission was never sought to take a second wife, even though according to the Quran, husbands are required to seek her permission.
            The largest group practicing polygamy today in America are not fundamentalist Mormons [est. 30,000-50,000] but American Muslims [est. 50,000-80,000]. Interestingly enough, almost all of them are immigrants, and all of them are explicitly breaking the terms of their immigration by practicing polygamy, and are eligible for immediate revocation of their visas and deportation. However, for some strange reason our government [DHS] sees no reason to enforce the terms of their immigration and deport them. Personally, I find an estimated 50,000 to 80,000 population of people who openly practice Sharia and place its importance over our laws and culture, disturbing. Especially, since like most domestic polygamists, all the extra concubines file for government assistance for themselves and their children as “single mothers.” I have documented polygamist “families” collecting more than $30,000 in food stamp assistance alone. That doesn’t include cash assistance or medical care, which we as tax payers also cover.
            Because I have been involved in this issue for almost 10 years, I could go on and on, for days, about the dangers polygamy is posing to us as a country and a culture.
            Oddly, my guess is that you are not very concerned with cold hard facts, like dozens of unexplained dead children in America’s polygamists communities, or the well documented phenomenon of child marriage, which is always found in every polygamist culture, but would rather live in your own little world where you just make stuff up to suit your own warped beliefs.

          • Blair

            I don’t deny that abuse happens, but again, you have to get down to the cause of the behavior. You cite the opinions of 80% of Afghan women who don’t like polygamy. I completely believe that because of a culture and religion that stresses inequality and male dominance. With those behaviors underlying the marital relationship, it is no wonder there is a proclivity for abuse! It is improper, however to cite polygamy as the cause of abuse – it is simply an opportunity for abuse to take place when there are underlying problems – just like in a monogamous relationship! Alcohol abuse is the same way – the practice is a result, but doesn’t get at the underlying behavior: depression.

            In order to make any kind of medical diagnosis, you have to isolate the symptom from the cause. Instead, you keep making broad generalizations and harping on your wealth of experience as some kind of license for you to tell us what to do and think. These are ineffective techniques for presenting logical arguments because they rely on manipulation instead of logic to make a point. I’d suggest you try the latter. I will be more than happy to concede the point if you can prove that polygamy is the cause and not the symptom of abuse.

          • FreeandClear

            The problem with polygamy is that the abuse is inherent – it is built into the practice. Yes there is abuse in monogamy, but it isn’t a direct result of monogamy itself. I was in polygamy for decades, and the women living in polygamy, in the main, did it from a sense of religious obligation, not because they liked it. They may have consented, but that doesn’t make their misery any the less. Whether you agree with gay marriage or not, there is no comparison to polygamy. Two people in an equal relationship is far more akin to monogamy.

          • vickyprunty

            Abuse is centered in the selfish premise and practice of polygyny–male centered marriage in which the male, and only the male, can take multiple sex partners. Polygyny is one-sided, and without the ability to correct itself and bring about a oneness founded upon equality (love). To argue whether polygamy is a relationship, or behavior, is avoiding the reality that it is already been found to be “inherently abusive” by Canada’s courts, and by many others who have lived it, and can admit it was the biggest mistake of their life.

          • FC

            Yet others have a different testimony of their experience in it. Both men and women. Why don’t they have the right to live the life they choose without fear because of people like you and your bigoted views?

          • vickyprunty

            Because tax-payers must deal with your arrogant and selfish decision.

          • FC

            Tax payers are dealing with everyone’s arrogant and selfish decisions! How is that a polygamy only issue? Hell some agree that tax dollars should fund abortions, including those not because of rape. Including those that come from someones selfish decision. The welfare system is a joke and they have people paying for all sorts if things they shouldn’t have to. How is that a polygamy only issue?

          • vickyprunty

            Yes, everyone is different, yet “all” polygyny is based on male privilege (it is built into the dynamics). Thankfully, the laws are created to protect the vulnerable in society, not the predators. The Supreme Court has ruled that the law supersedes harmful religious practices, and I doubt it will ever change. Look at the domestic abuse wheel based on power & control, when applied to polygyny it is synonymous. Throw out the harmful religion and culture, and your numbers of pretentious success shrivel.

          • FC

            No one is arguing that abuses should be allowed. Do not abuses also happen in monogamist marriages? So should we makes laws against all marriage to stop that from happening?

            Or should we go after those who are abusing others, regardless what form of marriage they have?

          • tcidda

            lifestyle

          • vickyprunty

            My polygamist husband strutted around fitting into mainstream culture with his wives too, until I saw through the gross illusion and left. Polygamy will never be accepted or legalized because there is no partnership in the marriage, and no equality between the sexes….it is one big lie. I am confident that the majority of Americans, once educated, can tell the difference between gay marriage and servitude of women.

          • FC

            ” I am confident that the majority of Americans, once educated, can tell
            the difference between gay marriage and servitude of women.” That what is your worry? why are you so afraid of polygamy? I mean what connecting adult would choose this?

            I’m no for forcing polygamy on anyone! But we both know this isn’t about that is it, its about others like you trying to force what you want on other people because you think you know more then everyone else and should get to decide what is best for them, rather they like or agree with it or not.

          • vickyprunty

            You are advocating for polygamy, and I have an opposing view….what’s the problem. It’s against the law, and for many good reasons, just read the research. Are you suggesting we change immigration laws to accept polygamists with their culture of multiple wives (even harems), and support them through welfare programs. What about non-legal plural wives who recieve zero property if they leave, or social security if their polygamist husband dies, or zero retirement money for being the caregiver to the polygamist’s brood….is this how you show love? The laws weren’t made for you & your family; they were made for society at large.

    • DMG

      Just wait till it’s marriage and sex with children and animals… Coming next! No morals, not stopping it unless there is a George Washington military morals war to stop these pathetic people. Check Emilys list ladies. I am shocked… What ever you want you get because you want it!

      Girls 11 years old having sex with who they want because they have the abortion pill they can buy over the counter and the parents will have the law called on them if they try to interfere with their 11 year old daughter who wants to be on the pill!

  • DMG

    I gave up on god and america! Lets see god show himself for once after 3000 or more years of his invisibleness! It’s his turn now!

    • Barrustio

      The Lord is not mocked

      • DMG

        Your quotes are from a book written by cavemen who were very lonely just like the below guys and were just wierdos. They didn’t write about what exactly happened – they wrote about what fictional account they could make up that excited them, just like camp fire stories.

        What was written 2000 or more years ago were written by lonely people who just wanted to be the popular ones in the crowd. We don’t know who these people really were as they are strangers and we all know that you don’t believe what strangers say or write especially if they are cave people uneducated. They wrote camp fire stories. Example: God came down from heaven and impregnated a virgin girl who had a little boy. The little boy grew up to do many marvellous miracles and went into hell and defeated the devil. He suffered in the end and god took him up in the sky to live in heaven with his father god for ever. Who was this boy? Well, it was Hercules in Greece 700 miles north of Israel between 300 and 600 years before Jesus.

        Not against Jesus at all – just the lying bible and all those preaching it and demanding 10% as the bible says. Jesus real father – dad was the human being Joseph himself. Joseph got Mary pregnant but the cavemen drug addicts wrote a drug induced story.

        What is this page?

        The ministries in the Gospel.com Community organize information into ‘topics’ to help you find what you’re looking for.

        Learn more

        Sort by:
        Latest bookmarks | Latest comments

        “Ask in my name” in the Bible: John 14:12-13

        Jesus says that if anyone asks for anything in his name it will be
        given to them so that the Son might bring glory to the Father.

        http://biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2014:12-13&version=NIV

        No one has ever seen this come true ever. If true – people would have cleaned up this planet 2000 + years ago where there is no sin.

        Sin is sin and is wrong and bad and never to do. Therefore – there is no such plan, reason and/or purpose for a so called spirit who supposedly is a sin free god who knows that any and all sin is wrong, to create and have sin come out of him as if he was alone before anything and he created all all all all al;l things and nobody else created anything, then sin was in his mind first and came out of him….. Makes him not sin free!!!!!

        Reverend Jim Jones Biography

        For years, one of his neighbours often took him to visit her church. Jones began his own religious quest around the age of 10. He visited churches in the small town of Lynn where he lived with his family and befriended a Pentecostal minister for a time. An observant child, Jones began taking what he learned at these different houses of worship and started preaching to other children in the community. He was a strong student, especially in public speaking, but he had few friends. His overpowering religious zest turned off some, and he, in turn, disliked many typical teenage boy activities, such as sports, and objected what he believed to be sinful behaviour, such as dancing or drinking.

        After his parents split up, Jones and his mother moved to Richmond, Indiana. There he had a chance to reinvent himself. He worked at a hospital as an orderly where he met Marceline Baldwin, an older nursing student. After graduating early from high school in December 1948, Jones started at Indiana University the following January. He married Marceline after his first term on June 12, 1949. The couple eventually adopted several children.
        The Peoples Temple

        After years of struggling to find his way, Jim Jones announced that he was entering the ministry in 1952. He got a job as a student pastor at the Somerset Methodist Church in a poor, predominantly white neighborhood in Indianapolis. By the following year, Jones was making a reputation for himself in the state as a healer and evangelist. He was interested in holding racially integrated services, but this interest was not shared by his church. Soon Jones branched out on his own, forming the Wings of Deliverance church in 1955. The church soon became known as the Peoples Temple. To help build his following, he bought time on a local AM radio station to air his sermons.

        Jim Jones was a notorious cult leader who was born on May 13, 1931, in Crete (near Lynn), Indiana. As the self-proclaimed messiah of the Peoples Temple religious cult, Jones promised his followers utopia if they followed him. On November 18, 1978, in what became known as the Jonestown Massacre, Jones led more than 900 men, women and children to their deaths in a mass suicide via cyanide-laced punch (spawning the metaphor “Don’t Drink the Kool-Aid”).

        David Koresh Biography

        David Koresh was the man responsible for the confused siege and arson of his religious compound outside of Waco, Texas, in 1993. The fire killed Koresh and 74 followers, including 21 children.

        Koresh was born Vernon Wayne Howell to a 15-year-old single mother. He never knew his father or his grandparents. He was a bad student, teased and ostracised, and his only interests were music and the bible. By 12, he could recite long passages from the book.

        He was welcomed into the Church of the Seventh Day Adventists in 1979, and quickly expelled again, for being an evil influence on his contemporaries. Spurned by his religion, Koresh turned to his other love, music. He went to Hollywood dreaming of becoming a rock star.

        He failed and ended up in Waco in 1981, where he joined the Branch Davidians, an offshoot of the Adventists. The founders of this apocalyptic sect, Ben and Lois Roden, had decided a new Messiah would arrive, signifying the start of the Last Days.

        Koresh had an affair with Lois, the geriatric prophetess and the couple travelled to Israel. She died in 1986, leaving Koresh and her son George to fight for control of the sect. Koresh stormed the compound, shot George in the chest and won. The new prophet was acquitted of attempted murder on a technicality.

        The FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco tried to arrest Koresh on 28 February 1993, on suspicion of child abuse and illegal weapons handling.

        A shoot out – killing four agents and six Davidians – precipitated a siege lasting 51 days. Finally, the compound burned to the ground. It is uncertain who started the fire.

        • Barrustio

          lol….perfect example of where we are headed when we have no moral compass…..we will do and say anything to justify our carnal desires

          • DMG

            You are a perfect example of religious left wing that like the ministers – preach jesus so much then cheat on their wives or husbands, steal the churches money, scam the people into giving their last 2 pennies so tjhey can take their family on a world vacation, buy new homes, live the good life and tell the people who are sleeping under a bridge to just keep praying to Jesus and he will help you. Priests having sex with children. Ministers and priests having drug and alcohol problems and all because they study the word so deep that they know exactly the whole meaning of what exactly Jesus meant and the show they know by living this way. So do the people in the church. All sinning hypocrites…

            I am married for 19 years 1 wife no lying, no cheating etc. I don’t need a book written by cavemen to know how exactly to live morally and how to help people and not hurt people. That knowledge comes from within unless you sit on satin’s lap like the good christians and the bible you are dependent on to always get forgiveness because the bible makes you weak to keep sinning to keep being forgiven. I am a republican conservative right wing believer in a real god that doesn’t play with sin in any way like the bible, koran and torah god.

          • Barrustio

            Those seeking justification for what THEY personally believe is right are very likely to cover all with one blanket like….assuming the are left wing liberals….or ALL priests are having sex with children ….and all ministers and priests have drug and alcohol problems….pointing out the flaws of others does not make one’s own go away….being prideful and self-righteous and self-exalting because you have never cheated on your wife does not really make you any better than cave men ….it also doesn’t mean there was no infidelity in your marriage (that you know of)….La sorra nunca se ve la cola…..translation….the fox never sees his own tail

          • DMG

            Ok hot shot – take your bible in hand and quit quoting lazy idiots and go into the black gang neighbourhoods in the street and start your talking to those kids. You don’t even talk a good game, just another couch potato wannabe bible thumper sounding dumb but not backing himself/herself up with dangerous work. Go and actually give your life up for Jesus. Go into the muslim mosques and teach them that Sharia law is not good and the Jihad is not good. Convert some muslims who are making bombs to blow up Americans. Your only full of BullSh*t sayings in front of a TV…
            Go now – convert some gang bangers in the street before they kill someone, maybe you.

          • Barrustio

            My my a testy “republican conservative right wing believer”……yeh right

  • nicholauss

    I can see that the” MUSLIMS” have gotten their way again. If I remember correctly, it is a practice of the “muslims” to have multiple wives. I think it may have something to do with “SHARIA LAW”. It’s getting closer folks.
    “NUFFSAID”

  • tcidda

    they want to marry more than one wife let them move to China or some place far,far away.

  • Barrustio

    Proponents of gay marriage will should be the biggest supporters of polygamy in view of their premise that everyone should be able to marry whomever they love….is there a limit on how many people you can love?

    • http://gmail.com/ veritas7

      First gay marriage, then will come gay polygamy and then will come ‘gay cloning’ so that gay couples can pass their genes on to their ‘offspring’.

  • Barrustio

    lol

    • DMG

      I am a republican conservative right wing believer in a real god that
      doesn’t play with sin in any way like the bible, koran and torah god.

      • Barrustio

        So are you alright with abortion, gay marriage and polygamy since your God doesn’t play with sin?

        • DMG

          I can tell you are a Satanist with your answer. abortion, gay marriage and polygamy are sins that you and your bible god Jehovah play with. My God and I are above you and your god looking down at you both and watching you 2 play with sin…

          • CB

            can someone give me the scripture explaining polygyny is a sin?

          • FC

            Its a good thing no such scripture exists because if it did, it would also condemn God who gave David multiple wives.

          • CB

            my thoughts also Fred

          • Barrustio

            I see….. so you ARE alright with abortion, gay marriage and polygamy …..wow!! How conservative can you get?

  • http://gmail.com/ veritas7

    First gay marriage, then will come gay polygamy and then will come ‘gay cloning’ so that gay couples can pass their genes on to their ‘offspring’. The moral compass is gone. Sure sounds like a scenario from Huxley’s “A Brave New World”

    • Barrustio

      Sad but true

  • websmith

    America is man made. So is marriage. God blessing either is just a wish. God has other things to do

  • FC

    the famed Reformationist Martin Luther wrote a letter in 1524 in which
    he commented on polygamy as follows: “I confess that I cannot forbid a
    person to marry several wives, for it does not oppose the Holy
    Scriptures.”