• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Polygamy (Split from Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack)

Who is the center of polygamous relationship has always been determined by status and wealth.
Gender is secondary.

I would also include power. And it when becomes clear that as women are treated with equality and they have the same status, wealth, and power and men, that the types of polygamy that have been created in the past when the men literally own their wives, will also pass away to different structures and family units where the power and status of those involved is also shared between genders.
 
Because societies that treat women well have only existed, and even then they aren't the whole way there, for about 30-40 years.

Societies that treat women as goods had it because they treated women as goods, it was exactly like having many cows or pigs.

There has never been a time in human history where women had the freedom of choice in where they wanted to form legal polyamorous marriages in the way that they were able to chose and design them in a free and equal manner.

And as to be the "first exception is human history," we already are. All past history has been built on the oppression of other people be that by gender, skin colour, or just nationality. We have been trying something really new since the 1960's and we still have a long way to go, but we're trying to build a society where there is no oppression of people different to those with power.

If polygamous societies get worse on the dimension of equal rights, then that would still hurt this argument.
 
I live a good portion of the time in a muslim area, on the border of where ISIS just had a war with the Philippine government. We were there with helicopter gunships and bombers flying overhead, they leveled the city next door to us, just a pile of rubble now.

I know how these people think, I talk to them at length about this very thing. They look at American culture and call our 13 year old girls whores. They parade around with their near-naked bodies on display - sexualized tots, sexualized adolescents, sexualized teens, they actually cite accurate statistics like 6% of US 13 year olds already having intercourse. FAR more are having some kind of sex and half of them by age 18 have had intercourse - almost zero of them married.

Unmarried teen pregnancy, single mom worship, men having sex with men, women with women, sex change operations - to them it is ghastly soddom and gommorah promiscuity at VERY young ages so how ironic to paint them as the sex perverts.

You point out muslim girls having sex that are MARRIED. Having children and raising families at 13, as if that was horrible? Are you out of your mind? Billions of people are cool with this, and logically so.

There is no welfare state in those cultures generally but let me be specific about the muslims where I live. Out-of-wedlock pregnancy is highly discouraged. A mortal affair.

A man must be assigned responsibility for children. Marriage is how you do it. It is not of concern whether he has one wife, two, whatever - as President Duterte (1/4 Moro) himself asserted while defending legal polygamy in the Philippines in a major speech... it is a matter of supporting the children.

You are not going to get permission under Shariah to take on another wife if don't have the resources. It is going to be just like me, as you get older and more established, are wiser and infiniately more lecherous, you get another FAR younger partner. And everyone is cool with it, everyone knows, both families, the exact rights and responsibilitites of every adult worked out face to face.

By age 18, half of American kids have already had intercourse. In the muslim world, the only way they had intercourse is if they were MARRIED. Who cares what age they are, it is proper. The improper sex is in the USA, not vice-versa. And that is what produces children without fathers to support them.

They wear the full burka, just the eye slits, in our neighborhood. A young muslim girl is escorted by an adult male from the family, and boy do they march her quickly, all business.

The purpose of protecting the women this way (you view it as imprisoning) is that a dowry is coming (bride price) from the man's family.

What the families are doing is joining forces, not buying and selling a girl. The ensuing children are from both families. The expectant father's family is investing in the bride's family, and this again is important where there is no welfare state.

A son to be proud of runs a business and makes a bunch of dough with hard work and honest trade. He can help support his aging parents. There is no welfare state for seniors either. The kids take care of the parents as the grim reaper draws nigh.

A daughter to be proud of can do the same thing. Except her business is in the home, making children. With a guy who runs a business and makes a bunch of dough with hard work and honest trade.

His number of wives is irrelevant. He either has sufficient dowry or not. A guy who is a doctor or architect, he can keep two families better than one man that sells cigarettes on the streets. How is this guy on the street going to pay for the children?

You don't let a daughter of any age fall in love with the guy selling cigarettes on the street. You do not even let her speak to him without guardianship. Because you have one shot with this daughter, when she is young and maximally fertile, fantastically beautiful, and she is not competent to make the decision.

It is EXACTLY what Americans argue about their own 13 year olds, 14 year olds, whatever the age of consent law prohibits. They cannot decide. It is statutory rape.

Well exactly so in the muslim world, but it is treated far more severely. Unless you are married, and that is highly encouraged. Be fruitful and multiply. The girl has passed from the protection of the father to the protection of the husband. Her children are provided for.

This is true in America too. You can marry at these ages, when you are insisting the girl cannot decide! So you actually agree on that point with the muslims, your society agrees they can be married off when both sets of parents approve along with a judge. What is the difference?

Look at this PC hypocrisy of insisting American girls cannot decide sex for themselves, despite the rampant sexualization of those very girls, of producing an epidemic of fatherless children and single mothers...

With all the horrific statistics on children of single mothers. The most abused. The least likely to succeed educationally, the most likely to end up committing crime, and to perpetuate even more fatherless children the next generation...

That is the result of Western culture. The kids are going to have sex if you do not directly chaperone them. Sex produces children, and there is no welfare state in the communities I speak of. So therefore the adults are in charge of making the sex decisions.

Except that they really are. And it is uncommon a 13 year old is married off in any case. She is going to be older, but nevertheless it is going to be an "arranged" marriage to a significant degree if not outright assigned.

Their idea of family relationships is that love grows between man and wife over time, not this romantic love idea the west has lately taken favor with. In it's wealth and decadence. It's utter depravity. Not even pretecting their 13 year olds. I see why they despise you.

The women, they see it as sensible with rare exceptions and those are rich princesses that can shoot their mouths off. You will call them brainwashed. And they will call yours brainwashed. Look how you cram feminism and LGBT down their throats relentlessly from the earliest age.

You are godless. They got you cold there. You say so what. They say there: he just proved how vile he is. Not even seeing why you need God, what filth.

I have to navigate both of these worlds to some degree, but the one thing I see both of you, American mainstream PC Culture and the muslims, is saying 13-17 year old girls cannot decide for themselves about sex.

One of them, the muslims, insist on linking it to marriage. The other permits it for marriage too, but absolutely lays the red carpet out for premarital sex by teens and propagates a culture of single mothers and fatherless children. Dependent upon the government, and with all the attendant bad social outcomes statistically.

We report, you decide.
 
If the participants in the marriage are forced into an arranged marriage against their wishes, then yes. If the participants want to be a part of an arranged marriage then no.
An arranged marriage would have to be a forced marriage by definition. It's possible that all parties involved in an arranged marriage would have freely chosen their spouse but the fact remains that the parties involved are not the one's who made the decision.

Some people do find an arranged marriage better as they don't have to worry about going through the whole dating business to find a partner, and for them arranged is fine. Arranging a marriage for your 4 year old and then demanding that they honour that arrangement regardless of their wishes, is not so good.

Arranged marriages are a time honored tradition. The way it works in the west where two young people without any real world experience are able to choose a marriage partner whom meet by random chance based on mutual sexual attraction is kind of crazy if you think about it.

I think that this is an vast over estimation of how much Muslim populations are actually growing compared to the rest of the population in western Countries. For instance, France has one of the fastest growing Muslim communities in Western Europe, but the rest of France's population is outstripping them fast enough that France's overall percentage of Muslims is actually decreasing.
Not true. Muslim birthrates are higher than those of the indigenous French. Their birthrates are higher than the indigenous populations everywhere in Europe, NA, Australia and New Zealand. Not to mention the growth in population from immigration.

A country doesn't need to be majority Islamic to adopt Islamic customs anyway. Jews are less than two percent of the population of the United States. They are allowed to resolve disputes through a Beit Din and in Rhode Island and New York state, Uncles can marry their nieces. The percentage of Muslims in the United States is approaching two percent. How can we deny our Islamic brothers and sisters the right to resolve disputes through a Sharia court or enter into a marriage that the majority of Americans would find odd when we have granted the Jewish community the right to practice their folkways?
 
An arranged marriage would have to be a forced marriage by definition. It's possible that all parties involved in an arranged marriage would have freely chosen their spouse but the fact remains that the parties involved are not the one's who made the decision.

Forced marriage is about being forced into marriage against your will, not in not having a say in who you will marry. You can freely agree to enter an arranged marriage and that marriage is not then forced on you.
 
Okay any arguments against polygamy that aren't "OMG da brown people are going to outbreed us white genocide eleventy!!!!"
 
I live a good portion of the time in a muslim area, on the border of where ISIS just had a war with the Philippine government. We were there with helicopter gunships and bombers flying overhead, they leveled the city next door to us, just a pile of rubble now.

I know how these people think, I talk to them at length about this very thing. They look at American culture and call our 13 year old girls whores. They parade around with their near-naked bodies on display - sexualized tots, sexualized adolescents, sexualized teens, they actually cite accurate statistics like 6% of US 13 year olds already having intercourse. FAR more are having some kind of sex and half of them by age 18 have had intercourse - almost zero of them married.

I was a submariner in the US Navy after that class stopped going to the Philippines. The older sailors had a lot of stories about when we were still allowed. I think the people you interact with should be more worried about their own country before focusing so much on some place so far away.
 
Okay any arguments against polygamy that aren't "OMG da brown people are going to outbreed us white genocide eleventy!!!!"

Well there is also the idea that women only want wealth and power in a mate and if they were allowed they would naturall congregate to individual powerful men and of course be monogamous to him because women hate sex.

So there is often more explicit sexism than racism in these "concerns", depending of course on how they are framed.
 
I live a good portion of the time in a muslim area, on the border of where ISIS just had a war with the Philippine government. We were there with helicopter gunships and bombers flying overhead, they leveled the city next door to us, just a pile of rubble now.

I know how these people think, I talk to them at length about this very thing. They look at American culture and call our 13 year old girls whores. They parade around with their near-naked bodies on display - sexualized tots, sexualized adolescents, sexualized teens, they actually cite accurate statistics like 6% of US 13 year olds already having intercourse. FAR more are having some kind of sex and half of them by age 18 have had intercourse - almost zero of them married.

Unmarried teen pregnancy, single mom worship, men having sex with men, women with women, sex change operations - to them it is ghastly soddom and gommorah promiscuity at VERY young ages so how ironic to paint them as the sex perverts.

You point out muslim girls having sex that are MARRIED. Having children and raising families at 13, as if that was horrible? Are you out of your mind? Billions of people are cool with this, and logically so.

There is no welfare state in those cultures generally but let me be specific about the muslims where I live. Out-of-wedlock pregnancy is highly discouraged. A mortal affair.

A man must be assigned responsibility for children. Marriage is how you do it. It is not of concern whether he has one wife, two, whatever - as President Duterte (1/4 Moro) himself asserted while defending legal polygamy in the Philippines in a major speech... it is a matter of supporting the children.

You are not going to get permission under Shariah to take on another wife if don't have the resources. It is going to be just like me, as you get older and more established, are wiser and infiniately more lecherous, you get another FAR younger partner. And everyone is cool with it, everyone knows, both families, the exact rights and responsibilitites of every adult worked out face to face.

By age 18, half of American kids have already had intercourse. In the muslim world, the only way they had intercourse is if they were MARRIED. Who cares what age they are, it is proper. The improper sex is in the USA, not vice-versa. And that is what produces children without fathers to support them.

They wear the full burka, just the eye slits, in our neighborhood. A young muslim girl is escorted by an adult male from the family, and boy do they march her quickly, all business.

The purpose of protecting the women this way (you view it as imprisoning) is that a dowry is coming (bride price) from the man's family.

What the families are doing is joining forces, not buying and selling a girl. The ensuing children are from both families. The expectant father's family is investing in the bride's family, and this again is important where there is no welfare state.

A son to be proud of runs a business and makes a bunch of dough with hard work and honest trade. He can help support his aging parents. There is no welfare state for seniors either. The kids take care of the parents as the grim reaper draws nigh.

A daughter to be proud of can do the same thing. Except her business is in the home, making children. With a guy who runs a business and makes a bunch of dough with hard work and honest trade.

His number of wives is irrelevant. He either has sufficient dowry or not. A guy who is a doctor or architect, he can keep two families better than one man that sells cigarettes on the streets. How is this guy on the street going to pay for the children?

You don't let a daughter of any age fall in love with the guy selling cigarettes on the street. You do not even let her speak to him without guardianship. Because you have one shot with this daughter, when she is young and maximally fertile, fantastically beautiful, and she is not competent to make the decision.

It is EXACTLY what Americans argue about their own 13 year olds, 14 year olds, whatever the age of consent law prohibits. They cannot decide. It is statutory rape.

Well exactly so in the muslim world, but it is treated far more severely. Unless you are married, and that is highly encouraged. Be fruitful and multiply. The girl has passed from the protection of the father to the protection of the husband. Her children are provided for.

This is true in America too. You can marry at these ages, when you are insisting the girl cannot decide! So you actually agree on that point with the muslims, your society agrees they can be married off when both sets of parents approve along with a judge. What is the difference?

Look at this PC hypocrisy of insisting American girls cannot decide sex for themselves, despite the rampant sexualization of those very girls, of producing an epidemic of fatherless children and single mothers...

With all the horrific statistics on children of single mothers. The most abused. The least likely to succeed educationally, the most likely to end up committing crime, and to perpetuate even more fatherless children the next generation...

That is the result of Western culture. The kids are going to have sex if you do not directly chaperone them. Sex produces children, and there is no welfare state in the communities I speak of. So therefore the adults are in charge of making the sex decisions.

Except that they really are. And it is uncommon a 13 year old is married off in any case. She is going to be older, but nevertheless it is going to be an "arranged" marriage to a significant degree if not outright assigned.

Their idea of family relationships is that love grows between man and wife over time, not this romantic love idea the west has lately taken favor with. In it's wealth and decadence. It's utter depravity. Not even pretecting their 13 year olds. I see why they despise you.

The women, they see it as sensible with rare exceptions and those are rich princesses that can shoot their mouths off. You will call them brainwashed. And they will call yours brainwashed. Look how you cram feminism and LGBT down their throats relentlessly from the earliest age.

You are godless. They got you cold there. You say so what. They say there: he just proved how vile he is. Not even seeing why you need God, what filth.

I have to navigate both of these worlds to some degree, but the one thing I see both of you, American mainstream PC Culture and the muslims, is saying 13-17 year old girls cannot decide for themselves about sex.

One of them, the muslims, insist on linking it to marriage. The other permits it for marriage too, but absolutely lays the red carpet out for premarital sex by teens and propagates a culture of single mothers and fatherless children. Dependent upon the government, and with all the attendant bad social outcomes statistically.

We report, you decide.

Well thought out and written. I have to agree with you on the hypocrisy of our culture.
 
Well thought out and written. I have to agree with you on the hypocrisy of our culture.

Except of course that most of the child marriage in the US isn't muslim, but hey nothing wrong with a good christian 50 year old man marrying someone who will start high school soon.
 
Except of course that most of the child marriage in the US isn't muslim, but hey nothing wrong with a good christian 50 year old man marrying someone who will start high school soon.

Pretty sure she's homeschooled. With the kind of textbooks that depict Adam and Eve riding dinosaurs.
 
Okay any arguments against polygamy that aren't "OMG da brown people are going to outbreed us white genocide eleventy!!!!"

Nothing I've said has anything to do with ethnicity or race, or even breeding rates. Is this sort of straw man really the best you have to offer?
 
Except of course that most of the child marriage in the US isn't muslim, but hey nothing wrong with a good christian 50 year old man marrying someone who will start high school soon.

I don't think you read the post.
 
Question: how do you distinguish a "forced" marriage from an "arranged" marriage? Arranged marriages are still common in some parts of the world, particularly Islamic countries, but I know people from Japan and India who were or have been in an arranged marriage. They were not uncommon in the Western world not too long ago.



IMHO there really is no difference and therefore cannot be banned, even within the context of Christian marriage.



As far as polygamy, it will become legal in the near future because of the growing Muslim populations in the west. We can't build an inclusive and multicultural society while continuing to demand that people give up their customs and adopt ours when they come and live in our countries. Polygamy is legal in Islamic countries, as are arranged marriages. It's only a matter of time before it comes to our countries. It might take a series of small steps before it's accepted as normal, like legalizing avunculate marriage has been. Or it might change practically overnight like gay marriage did. But polygamous marriage is coming.
Quite easy.

Did you want to marry this person?

If the answer is yes, it's not a forced marriage.

If the answer is no, it's a forced marriage.

Certainly in the UK we've been able to legislate for this. We prosecute people who have taken their kids abroad to get them married against their will. Indeed being forced to marry is grounds for an annulment.

Now of course someone could be brainwashed or indoctrinated so they only think they have a choice or think they have to accept a forced marriage. But that's a cultural issue that can only be addressed by active education and providing support and safety for the forced party.
 
Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Wishful thinking fallacy on your part.

B.S.! Those countries also don't allow gay marriage and we do. The sky hasn't fallen, Chicken Little.

What does gay marriage have to do with it? The mechanisms by which polygamy causes problems don't apply to gay marriage.

No, it doesn't and never has, Marriage is nothing but a property contract between two people which doesn't come into play until the marriage is over. That can be extended to multi-person agreements with little problem.

I am, in fact, married and my wife agrees with me although she is not okay with me having a relationship with other women while I am perfectly fine with her having relationships with other men, or women, if she so chooses.

Well, I was half right. You don't understand normal marriages.

She feels that people should be allowed to live life the way they choose.

That's doubtful. Discounting psychopaths (and I'll assume your wife isn't), nobody really believes that. Everyone thinks there are some behaviors which aren't acceptable. Some people have a wider range of behavior they find acceptable than others, but society can't function if there are no limits, and this is obvious to everyone. So there really isn't a debate here between limiting behavior and not limiting behavior, but only about what the proper limits should be.
 

Back
Top Bottom