Did anyone listen to NPR yesterday? (5/28)

[Atreus21]

I wanted to see if anyone else listened to this broadcast, and to hear what they thought about it.

Essentially, they were painting it as a two-way issue. They restricted their reporting mostly to American Muslims who followed an Orthodox version of Islam that permitted men to take up to four wives. The way it worked was that only one marriage was by the state, and the rest were done by religious ceremonies. Some women felt oppressed, and some women willingly engaged in it.

I think it's interesting timing, because I had a pretty heated debate on this in context to the gay marriage issue last week in this forum. I'm not sure what to think about this broadcast, though. On one hand, they said some women disliked not being the only one, but other women liked it just fine, and in fact met it with enthusiasm.

But I can't help but point out the following: In none of these relationships did women complain of physical or sexual abuse. But to be fair, the reporter didn't ask them this, at least not that I heard of. But one would think the reporter would think of such a question pretty easily on this issue.

I don't think I like the fact that they were reporting on it. In a conspiratorial sort of way, I see this as giving it some real-world legitimacy; talking to real people who led ordinary lives, except for living in polygamy. I mean, is polygamy taboo or not? If not, then why is it illegal?

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

MYOFB

What does it matter?

 

[GTKeeper]

I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

 

[GTKeeper]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

 

[OrByte]

Polygamy practiced by immigrants, brought into the United States, is a relatively new thing.

I did listen to the NPR broadcast. It was interesting to hear African Islamic women discuss their marriages. The reporter for that broadcast explained that the men have a huge amount of power over those women that are wedded via religious ceremony and not those wedded by the state. Basically at all times those women wedded in religious ceremonies live in fear that they will be ratted out by their husbands and deported back to wherever they came from.

Yes some explained that they have no problem being in polygamous marriages, but I think a couple of those women expressed different views. I do recall one woman saying that she had a problem at first with her man going out and marrying a second girl half her age and spending more time with his new bride while Wife #1 stayed at home with their children, but that she got over it.

I did like the ending when the one man expressed that he didn?t want another wife, that one was more than enough!

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

Exactly, and that is another reason why in the US polygamy is currently illegal. But if a group wishes to fight for its right to practice polygamy (and there have been plenty of cases in Utah, Arizona, and Texas) then they need to go through the legal channels to get that right. And I am sure that whatever state they reside in they will get the opportunity to plead their case before a court.

But apparently no one cares enough to make in impact in these laws.

Since the OP made reference to his gay marriage thread I have to add that this is a CLEAR distinction between why gay marriage is in fact a legal issue today and why polygamy isn't. Society is ready to take on the issue of gay marriage. There is a growing segment of society who is fighting for that right. AND it is being heard and discussed in legislative and legal arenas across the country.

But who is to say that polygamy won't have its day in the national spotlight? who knows...

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

Exactly, and that is another reason why in the US polygamy is currently illegal. But if a group wishes to fight for its right to practice polygamy (and there have been plenty of cases in Utah, Arizona, and Texas) then they need to go through the legal channels to get that right. And I am sure that whatever state they reside in they will get the opportunity to plead their case before a court.

But apparently no one cares enough to make in impact in these laws.

Since the OP made reference to his gay marriage thread I have to add that this is a CLEAR distinction between why gay marriage is in fact a legal issue today and why polygamy isn't. Society is ready to take on the issue of gay marriage. There is a growing segment of society who is fighting for that right. AND it is being heard and discussed in legislative and legal arenas across the country.

But who is to say that polygamy won't have its day in the national spotlight? who knows...

Well I agree. But are we going to apply any standards to marriage at all? If not, why should we even have marriage? For that matter, isn't it discriminatory to unmarried couples that married couples get tax breaks?

 

[GenHoth]

I see no reason to say no. But I have a feeling the girl I end up marrying won't be having any of that.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Why should marriage have anything to do with the .gov at all?

Oh honey I love you, let's bring the government into this!

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Why should marriage have anything to do with the .gov at all?

Oh honey I love you, let's bring the government into this!

It already does. There is a marriage license involved and law is involved in divorces.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

Exactly, and that is another reason why in the US polygamy is currently illegal. But if a group wishes to fight for its right to practice polygamy (and there have been plenty of cases in Utah, Arizona, and Texas) then they need to go through the legal channels to get that right. And I am sure that whatever state they reside in they will get the opportunity to plead their case before a court.

But apparently no one cares enough to make in impact in these laws.

Since the OP made reference to his gay marriage thread I have to add that this is a CLEAR distinction between why gay marriage is in fact a legal issue today and why polygamy isn't. Society is ready to take on the issue of gay marriage. There is a growing segment of society who is fighting for that right. AND it is being heard and discussed in legislative and legal arenas across the country.

But who is to say that polygamy won't have its day in the national spotlight? who knows...

Well I agree. But are we going to apply any standards to marriage at all?

I say no.

the reason is that no one will ever agree to what those "standards" should be. Which is exactly where America as a country with laws to protect everyone's rights OUGHT to be. Regardless to whether or not polygamy is illegal currently, or whether or not marrying your dog is legal currently or isn't...in whatever state you reside in. If you wish to gain the right to marry your dog then take it to court...and see how far you get.

Christian standards (and I know you are Christian, so am I) should remain in the Christian church. If your church chooses to not wed gays or polygamist then that is your standard.

The Mormon church, Islamic Church, the dog loving church, or whatever church will have a different standard. And each should be governed independantly by the laws of the state in which those churches reside. And that is the case as we have it today.

Why try to limit the freedoms of other churches who choose to abide by a different standard than yours?

Does this mean I advocate for polygamy? No. I do not think polygamy is a fair deal. Do I advocate for the rights of others to seek polygamist marriage? sure! take it to the court, and see how far you get. If history is any indictation you won't get far. Same thing goes for marrying your dog.

To me that is a pretty good standard to go by.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Why should marriage have anything to do with the .gov at all?

Oh honey I love you, let's bring the government into this!

:thumbsup:

Marriage is one place where it's obvious that the government is the problem rather than the solution. All legal reasons for marriage are now able to be accomplished through other means (e.g. powers-of-attorney).

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

Exactly, and that is another reason why in the US polygamy is currently illegal. But if a group wishes to fight for its right to practice polygamy (and there have been plenty of cases in Utah, Arizona, and Texas) then they need to go through the legal channels to get that right. And I am sure that whatever state they reside in they will get the opportunity to plead their case before a court.

But apparently no one cares enough to make in impact in these laws.

Since the OP made reference to his gay marriage thread I have to add that this is a CLEAR distinction between why gay marriage is in fact a legal issue today and why polygamy isn't. Society is ready to take on the issue of gay marriage. There is a growing segment of society who is fighting for that right. AND it is being heard and discussed in legislative and legal arenas across the country.

But who is to say that polygamy won't have its day in the national spotlight? who knows...

Well I agree. But are we going to apply any standards to marriage at all?

I say no.

the reason is that no one will ever agree to what those "standards" should be. Which is exactly where America as a country with laws to protect everyone's rights OUGHT to be. Regardless to whether or not polygamy is illegal currently, or whether or not marrying your dog is legal currently or isn't...in whatever state you reside in. If you wish to gain the right to marry your dog then take it to court...and see how far you get.

Christian standards (and I know you are Christian, so am I) should remain in the Christian church. If your church chooses to not wed gays or polygamist then that is your standard.

The Mormon church, Islamic Church, the dog loving church, or whatever church will have a different standard. And each should be governed independantly by the laws of the state in which those churches reside. And that is the case as we have it today.

Why try to limit the freedoms of other churches who choose to abide by a different standard than yours?

Does this mean I advocate for polygamy? No. I do not think polygamy is a fair deal. Do I advocate for the rights of others to seek polygamist marriage? sure! take it to the court, and see how far you get. If history is any indictation you won't get far. Same thing goes for marrying your dog.

To me that is a pretty good standard to go by.

I'm honestly not sure. If the government should stay out of the marriage issue, then there should be zero recognition of marriage legally, because in doing so they are setting a standard.

We do limit the freedoms of churches. If a church believes its men are entirely justified in beating their wives, the government will and should interfere. Also, the government won't recognize a church that believes in ritual suicide. You get where I'm going with this. The government does have standards for morality, many of which are synonymous with the morals implicit in Christian denominations.

If marriage is strictly a religious issue, then there should be no marriages outside of a religion. And there should be no governmental recognition of these marriages. But that's ridiculous.

 

[Moonbeam]

Does anybody know why Islam allows more than one wife?

 

[OutHouse]

if consenting adults want to live a polygamy life thats fine by me.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I think you bring up a valid point. I think if the legal issues of polygamy are resolved I don't see why people can't have 10000 wives if they want, or if wives want to have 10000 husbands.

To me, I don't care how people live, as long as it doesnt interfere with my liberties, my financial security, or my physical welfare.

I don't think I was expecting a reply like this.

To answer your questions directly. The reason why polygamy is illegal is due to the fact that the US was founded on Christian beliefs and polygamy is something that is strictly forbidden in traditional Christian sense.

Is it taboo? I don't know. I think personally polygamy is not something that I would fight for or support, but if the majority of people feel that it should be legal and 'normal' then have at it.

Exactly, and that is another reason why in the US polygamy is currently illegal. But if a group wishes to fight for its right to practice polygamy (and there have been plenty of cases in Utah, Arizona, and Texas) then they need to go through the legal channels to get that right. And I am sure that whatever state they reside in they will get the opportunity to plead their case before a court.

But apparently no one cares enough to make in impact in these laws.

Since the OP made reference to his gay marriage thread I have to add that this is a CLEAR distinction between why gay marriage is in fact a legal issue today and why polygamy isn't. Society is ready to take on the issue of gay marriage. There is a growing segment of society who is fighting for that right. AND it is being heard and discussed in legislative and legal arenas across the country.

But who is to say that polygamy won't have its day in the national spotlight? who knows...

Well I agree. But are we going to apply any standards to marriage at all?

I say no.

the reason is that no one will ever agree to what those "standards" should be. Which is exactly where America as a country with laws to protect everyone's rights OUGHT to be. Regardless to whether or not polygamy is illegal currently, or whether or not marrying your dog is legal currently or isn't...in whatever state you reside in. If you wish to gain the right to marry your dog then take it to court...and see how far you get.

Christian standards (and I know you are Christian, so am I) should remain in the Christian church. If your church chooses to not wed gays or polygamist then that is your standard.

The Mormon church, Islamic Church, the dog loving church, or whatever church will have a different standard. And each should be governed independantly by the laws of the state in which those churches reside. And that is the case as we have it today.

Why try to limit the freedoms of other churches who choose to abide by a different standard than yours?

Does this mean I advocate for polygamy? No. I do not think polygamy is a fair deal. Do I advocate for the rights of others to seek polygamist marriage? sure! take it to the court, and see how far you get. If history is any indictation you won't get far. Same thing goes for marrying your dog.

To me that is a pretty good standard to go by.

I'm honestly not sure. If the government should stay out of the marriage issue, then there should be zero recognition of marriage legally, because in doing so they are setting a standard.

We do limit the freedoms of churches. If a church believes its men are entirely justified in beating their wives, the government will and should interfere. Also, the government won't recognize a church that believes in ritual suicide. You get where I'm going with this. The government does have standards for morality, many of which are synonymous with the morals implicit in Christian denominations.

If marriage is strictly a religious issue, then there should be no marriages outside of a religion. And there should be no governmental recognition of these marriages. But that's ridiculous.

And given that Christianity is part of the foundation of this country then we should expect that there is a level of westernized christian moral standard established in our government. But it is not our governments responsibility to govern via a Christan moral standard.

I agree with what you say. I think where we differ is that I believe that the government should have never established marriage certificates...only unions. And once the government adopted the term 'marriage' it adopted all of the connotations associated with that term...all of those "christian moral standards." Only thing is, Christianity has a limited scope on what marriage is or isn't. And that scope is getting narrower to the point where a segment of Americans are being recognized as not included, AND that other people are attempting to apply that 'christian moral standard' to a level of governmental law that has been historically preserved for PROTECTING American rights (I speak about the Constitution, State Constitutions) and not LIMITING American rights. It is insane!

And I just don't believe that we should be saying that the term 'marriage' is sacred and exclude others from using it. And that is the only rational basis for the argument against gays. imho its dumb because I don't care what it is you THINK is sacred and neither should our government unless of course we are talking about human sacrifices, ritual suicide blah blah blah...

In reality, marriage is not just a religious issue, and that is mistake number one. But since that mistake has already been made it is up to the government to ensure that all of these "moral standards" associated with marriage are protected for those individual religions, and not to bleed over to other religions or other moral standards. Again unless we are talking about underage marriage, ritual suicide/sacrifices blah blah blah please don't go down that slippery slope. 🙂

I think Christians should be careful about applying "standards" that shouldn't be applied to a country that isn't all Christian.

And don't get me started on these "Christian Moral Standards!" 😛

 

[BoberFett]

Who the hell wants multiple wives? I'll stick to a single wife and multiple girlfriends.

Seriously though, it's nobody's business how many people are married. The state shouldn't care, it shouldn't be doling out financial incentives one way or another.

 

[Atreus21]

Okay then. So we've established that there's nothing wrong with polygamy.

I can't believe it. I actually proved a point for once.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
Okay then. So we've established that there's nothing wrong with polygamy.

I can't believe it. I actually proved a point for once.

hehehe

well I wouldn't go so far as to say that there is nothing wrong with polygamy. I think the argument against polygamy is still formidable.

historically polygamy has been associated with incest, pedophilia, and coercion. If you look at the cases that have been brought before courts in Utah, Arizona, and Texas you will see that this precedence exists. I don't think any state wants to be held liable for condoning and accepting a practice that has that history. Especially since it is politically and socially acceptable to enforce laws that prohibit polygamy as it exists today. Yes the same could be said for regular marriage in that there is a history of violence, rape, incest, and other bad things but the line where it is drawn TODAY is again acceptable, until someone has a justifiable/valid reason to challenge existing laws and change it.

So.

Polygamy acceptance might change in the future, but for now it serves societies interests to keep polygamy on the fringe.

 

[jonks]

What if Bill Gates married every woman in America and then died? I think the logistics alone would permanently cripple our economy.

 

[zephyrprime]

Polygamy will never be allowed in the US and the reasons have nothing to do with morality or political ideologies.

Ultimately the issue would be decided by VOTES. Look at history and the math involved. Mathematically, more men lose out in polygamy than benefit from it. If Hugh Hefner acquires 3 wives, 2 men would lose out on the chance to marry. Those two men, even though they are not definitely identifiable, will not be voting to support polygamy. Traditional societies were only able to maintain polygamy because power was concentrated in the polygamists and democracy didn't exist.

Now polyandry could potentially balance out the numbers but let's be realistic. Polyandry has never been popular and I see no likelihood that it would ever be.

Also, in any country where there is equality between the sexes, women in existing marriages would have a strong financial disincentive to support polygamy. In traditional societies, the women didn't have any control over property but in the US, every time an existing marriage with N people in it added another wife, existing marriage members would have to sacrifice a portion of their wealth equal to 1/(N+1). The new wife could possibly bring in new money, but in practice, this doesn't happen a lot. Also, in polygamists societies, most women have no legal say in the addition of new wives but in the US, there would have to be some sort of vote on it between existing marriage partners.

In reality, the US is moving not towards gay marriage or polygamy. What's happening on the street is that the US is moving towards NO MARRIAGE. Just look around and you'll see what I mean.

 

[MadRat]

Muslims, it said, could have up to 4 wives IF and ONLY IF they treated them all equally. And then the woman said it was impossible for a man to do that. And the women in the broadcast described the abuse and shame they were dealt by their Muslim "husbands". Many of the women were illegal and since the marriages were not legal the husbands used deportation as leverage to rid themselves of these women when they desired to end their free milk. And they claimed 50,000 of these type of polygamists are currently in America. (It made no mention of Mormons or other white polygamists.) It really painted a poor picture of black immigrants from West Africa that practice polygamist marriages. I didn't realize that Islam was the predominate language of those immigrants. But it did say how mosques try to weed these practitioners out of their following.

In the post-9/11 America why would they allow so many Muslims with bass ackwards ideas on what is acceptable within American culture come to America?

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In reality, the US is moving not towards gay marriage or polygamy. What's happening on the street is that the US is moving towards NO MARRIAGE. Just look around and you'll see what I mean.

If only 1 in 10 people are married in traditional societies then perhaps the norm was not to marry in the first place. Jesus and the apostles were not too found of the wrong people marrying. I find it ironic that the churches all try to force shotgun weddings on the very same people that their original leaders would of never condoned to marry in the first place.

 

[Moonbeam]

Does anybody know why Islam allows more than one wife? I for one wouldn't want any relevant information coloring my thinking.