Legalize Polygamy!

[TerryMathews]

In short, I suspect that any fanciful notion of polygamous relationships, regardless of how idealistically conceived, goes against the natural human grain and won't find wide appeal.

You realize that racism, survival of the fittest, and might makes right are part of the "natural human grain" also right?

Odd, I don't see you posting in many threads supporting racism. I wonder why that is?

 

[Moonbeam]

You realize that racism, survival of the fittest, and might makes right are part of the "natural human grain" also right?

Odd, I don't see you posting in many threads supporting racism. I wonder why that is?

Racism is an intellectually created division. There is only one human race. Survival of the fittest is a theory that explains the perpetuation and concentration of adaptive advantages that have a genetic origin. Might makes right is a mental rationalization propounded by a will to dominate. These are all ideas that you have assigned to your idea of what is the human grain. I see a world that is overwhealmingly monogamous. Monogamy isn't a theoretical construct or intellectual abstraction beyond describing a creature as typically having one mate. Humans are monogamous in the main, like grass is green. It seems to be the normal condition that grass is green. Grass isn't racist for being green and I'm nat a racist for saying it's. green. If you ate confused, I would say it's because you may prefer to be.

 

[SMOGZINN]

My point is that monogamy is an evolutionary success, practiced by humans for millions of years, a corner stone of our development of self aware intelligence, that it is universal, not religious based, and a part of our genetic makeup. I believe that what you face is the overwhelming evidence of the human naturalness of the pair bond instinct with a new age invention that has little natural substance.

Some of the very earliest writing in human history talks of polygamy. It is not a 'new age' invention. If you look around you will see that people are BAD at monogamy. It does not come naturally, it is a lot of work. Individuals in monogamous relationships have to constantly fight against their nature to maintain the monogamy. This is not genetic makeup. Genetic studies show that monogamy evolved much more recently, less than 10 to 20,000 years ago.

It is not universal, there are a number of cultures that do not practice monogamy. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies from around the world noted, only 186 were monogamous. I think it is clear that monogamy is neither universal nor the natural state of humans.

 

[TerryMathews]

Racism is an intellectually created division. There is only one human race. Survival of the fittest is a theory that explains the perpetuation and concentration of adaptive advantages that have a genetic origin. Might makes right is a mental rationalization propounded by a will to dominate. These are all ideas that you have assigned to your idea of what is the human grain. I see a world that is overwhealmingly monogamous. Monogamy isn't a theoretical construct or intellectual abstraction beyond describing a creature as typically having one mate. Humans are monogamous in the main, like grass is green. It seems to be the normal condition that grass is green. Grass isn't racist for being green and I'm nat a racist for saying it's. green. If you ate confused, I would say it's because you may prefer to be.

You can't argue with this level of crazy.

I think you might be the only person on the planet who believe that monogamy isn't a religious creation.

 

[Moonbeam]

SMOGZINN: Some of the very earliest writing in human history talks of polygamy. It is not a 'new age' invention.

M: You suggested that I had a traditional view on polygamy which you responded to with your own present day village of polygamists picture. I was referring to that as new age.

S: If you look around you will see that people are BAD at monogamy. It does not come naturally, it is a lot of work. Individuals in monogamous relationships have to constantly fight against their nature to maintain the monogamy. This is not genetic makeup. Genetic studies show that monogamy evolved much more recently, less than 10 to 20,000 years ago.

M: From http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/science/monogamys-boost-to-human-evolution.html?_r=0

Our own ancestors split off from the ancestors of chimpanzees about seven million years ago. Fossils may offer us some clues to how our mating systems evolved after that parting of ways. The hormone levels that course through monogamous primates are different from those of other species, possibly because the males aren’t in constant battle for females.

That difference in hormones influences how primates grow in some remarkable ways. For example, the ratio of their finger lengths is different.

In 2011, Emma Nelson of the University of Liverpool and her colleagues looked at the finger bones of ancient hominid fossils. From what they found, they concluded that hominids 4.4 million years ago mated with many females. By about 3.5 million years ago, however, the finger-length ratio indicated that hominids had shifted more toward monogamy.

And as for monogamy being hard, my understanding of that is not something you are going to be able to readily believe because it involves knowing the last thing that anybody wants to know, that we hate ourselves and do not know it, nor do we want to. The problem is that when you hate yourself you long for somebody to love you, for the perfect partner who will fill that whole in the self. And when they do, the disbelief and testing begin along with rejection. Only a fool would love somebody as worthless as what we feel. If you are honest and observe this is what you will see. This is why love turns to hate. The hate was always there just waiting. A lot of folk try to avoid this by an inability to form a commitment.

S: It is not universal, there are a number of cultures that do not practice monogamy. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies from around the world noted, only 186 were monogamous. I think it is clear that monogamy is neither universal nor the natural state of humans.

I think you want to believe what you do. I don't think I have any particular reason to believe as I do other than what I see right in front of me.

The of people in the majority of societies in which polygamy is present do not
practice it and when they do their polygamous relations are long term. The link also affirms my assertion that monogamy provides a foundation for the evolution of large brain size.

 

[Moonbeam]

You can't argue with this level of crazy.

I think you might be the only person on the planet who believe that monogamy isn't a religious creation.

Hehehehehe You are so funny. One of the best forms of monogamy I know of is a fish that lives deep in the sea, the male of the species of which fuses its self to the body of a female where they live out their lives together. Of course I am sure they do so because of some religious belief.

 

[TerryMathews]

Hehehehehe You are so funny. One of the best forms of monogamy I know of is a fish that lives deep in the sea, the male of the species of which fuses its self to the body of a female where they live out their lives together. Of course I am sure they do so because of some religious belief.

Monogamy

Main article:*Monogamous pairing in animals

See also:*Evolution of monogamy

Zoologists*and*biologists*now have solid evidence that monogamous pairs of animals are not always sexually exclusive. Many animals that form pairs to mate and raise offspring regularly engage in sexual activities with extra-pair partners.[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]*This includes previous examples, such as*swans. Sometimes, these extra-pair sexual activities lead to offspring. Genetic tests frequently show that some of the offspring raised by a monogamous pair come from the female mating with an extra-pair male partner.[7][8][20][21]

From http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexual_behaviour

 

[Moonbeam]

From http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexual_behaviour

That was your argument that monogamy is religious?

 

[shira]

So then it would seem that the right to polygamy is undeniable.:thumbsup:

And in fact even more undeniable than same-sex "marriage", because polygamy is undeniably marriage, whereas same-sex "marriage" is merely applying the word marriage to a totally unrelated relationship.

So you're against marriages involving two people of the same sex, but you're all for marriages that involve, say, three or more people of the same sex.

Totally credible.

 

[shira]

My dad taught me to drink as much as he did and taught me it was ok to sleep around on the women I was with.
I suppose that may be some alpha male crap.
It took me decades to see that my mom was the one who really sacrificed and held things together.
Without a doubt, I would of been better off if he was out of the picture.
Near the end of their lives, we had all come together in agreement with this.

edit- You learn to accept the shit, learn from it and pass it on
I wouldn't have the 3 perfect children I have, that I had with 3 different women
They are all well aware of my mistakes and I think they have learned from them too

Unfortunately, it sounds like you learned from your father's mistakes too late. And your children may well not have learned from your mistakes early enough.

 

[shira]

Actually, they are hypocrites. What if we banned gay marriage until we discussed "exactly how laws should be changed", such as working out who'd get custody if a lesbian couple divorces?

The only reason we don't do that with gay marriage is because its "in" now.

No, if delaying until we get it completely right is the truly fair course, then the RIGHT alternative would be to ban ALL marriages until the new law is perfect.

But, somehow, I'm guessing you wouldn't be for that truly fair alternative. In which case, who's the hypocrite now?

 

[shira]

You're right, how could we possibly understand the division of property between more than two parties. The human mind simply can't cope with such a complex concept.

Sometimes you're a complete ass. You refuse to acknowledge that - unlike same sex marriages - poly marriages WOULD require significant reworkings of many laws. For example, consider the ACA, which requires that companies with more than 30 full-time employees provide group coverage to all. Now assume an employee shows up at a small-sized company who's married to 100,000 other people. Think that might throw a wrench into the works? Or how about the tax laws? Think that the tax tables, standard deductions, exemptions, and filing status might be affected when - in a poly marriage - there are 500 people filing jointly and 300 others filing separately? And I think a fair-minded appraisal of the impacts of more normal-sized poly marriages would lead to the conclusion that many laws would get rather messy.

But apart from how poly marriages would affect various laws, there are other principled and rational objections to poly marriage as practiced in the U.S. (child abuse and exploitation of women), and absolutely no rational objections to same-sex marriage.

So scoff all you want at what you're so sure is the "inconsistency" of those who have no problem with same-sex marriage, but who simultaneously take pause at poly marriages. You're just proving to everyone else that you're a fool.

 

[TerryMathews]

That was your argument that monogamy is religious?

No, attacking your point that monogamy comes from nature.

 

[TerryMathews]

Sometimes you're a complete ass. You refuse to acknowledge that - unlike same sex marriages - poly marriages WOULD require significant reworkings of many laws. For example, consider the ACA, which requires that companies with more than 30 full-time employees provide group coverage to all. Now assume an employee shows up at a small-sized company who's married to 100,000 other people. Think that might throw a wrench into the works? Or how about the tax laws? Think that the tax tables, standard deductions, exemptions, and filing status might be affected when - in a poly marriage - there are 500 people filing jointly and 300 others filing separately? And I think a fair-minded appraisal of the impacts of more normal-sized poly marriages would lead to the conclusion that many laws would get rather messy.

But apart from how poly marriages would affect various laws, there are other principled and rational objections to poly marriage as practiced in the U.S. (child abuse and exploitation of women), and absolutely no rational objections to same-sex marriage.

So scoff all you want at what you're so sure is the "inconsistency" of those who have no problem with same-sex marriage, but who simultaneously take pause at poly marriages. You're just proving to everyone else that you're a fool.

Your point fails for one simple reason: Obamacare doesn't mandate employers offer family health care. Some don't. As long as they offer individual coverage to the employee they have met their statutory requirement. Meijer is one example off the top of my head that operates on this basis.

Furthermore, and this is much more common: some employers only subsidize the individual (employee) portion of the plan and the cost of the family portion is paid fully by the employee. It would be trivial on the scale of things HR does to calculate a "per spouse per pay" figure to be passed to the employee.

 

[Stewox]

Let's legalize no-warrant public executions!

Let's legalize people running around every sunday and killing whoever they want!

Let's legalize obama nuking the ozone layer to blow out the atmosphere! I'm Loving it!

Let's legalize a 3000-some family with clones and failed test subjects! Yeah.

Let's legalize clones and robots to lurk the cities undetected!

Let's leagalize feudalism, first come first serve, pick your castle and start killing people. Yeeeha! Blood is in the air.

Let's legalize nuking the oceans for FUN! Oh hell yeah!

Let's legalize liberals to kill all conservatives, for FREE! Tickets available at your local Oh-Bamastore.

Let's legalize the illegal alie.. errr unaccompanied children to rape your mother, pay no taxes, dictate your life, and eat the flesh of your starved-out dead grandma's body! Yuhu!

Let's legalize sex with babies! Fun For Everyone! Heil Satan!

Let's legalize the new world order! Kill 99% and turn the 1% into robots! Everybody WINS! Brought to you by Google-Darpa Incorporated, because morality is none of our business

 

[OverVolt]

..

 

[OverVolt]

..

 

[Orignal Earl]

Unfortunately, it sounds like you learned from your father's mistakes too late. And your children may well not have learned from your mistakes early enough.

I try and not look at any of it as unfortunate.
My youngest knocked up his now ex-girlfriend a couple years ago
Like I said it took me decades, and I'm still figuring out things everyday.

I'm no where near perfect. I look at my quote there for example and can see I could of done a better job on it. Hell, two minutes after I hit submit reply right now I will probably want to fix something. This applies to my real life too.
But I work on bettering myself everyday and I learn new things everyday.

I pondered and typed on this for over a half hour now.
Fuck it, hits submit reply

 

[nehalem256]

So you're against marriages involving two people of the same sex, but you're all for marriages that involve, say, three or more people of the same sex.

Totally credible.

What are you talking about. A man gets married to a woman. Then later the man gets married to a different woman. Really its no different than now except he didn't get a divorce from the first woman before marrying again. I don't see any same-sex marriage going on.

But apart from how poly marriages would affect various laws, there are other principled and rational objections to poly marriage as practiced in the U.S. (child abuse and exploitation of women), and absolutely no rational objections to same-sex marriage.

Single motherhood leads to child abuse and women and children living in poverty.

Are you also opposed to single motherhood based on this obvious rational objections?

 

[Orignal Earl]

Let's legalize nuking the oceans for FUN! Oh hell yeah!

It would be done in the name of Science


TIL of Starfish. A 60's US military experiment designed to see what would happen when a nuke was detonated 250 miles above Earth's magnetic pole. It resulted in an EMP 900 miles wide, an intense artificial aurora, and a radiation belt that disabled 1/3 of the low orbit satellites and lasted 5 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime

 

[Moonbeam]

No, attacking your point that monogamy comes from nature.

By quoting natural world observations regarding monogamy? Your attacks, as you call them are so absurd as to be incomprehensible. I don't like to say so, but trying to deal with your off the wall nonsense feels like a drag on my time. So punch away but forgive me if I don't respond further.

My theory is that you have Ben unfaithful to your wife and are attacking me out of a sense of guilt. Go play with that.

 

[Moonbeam]

Let's legalize no-warrant public executions!

Let's legalize people running around every sunday and killing whoever they want!

Let's legalize obama nuking the ozone layer to blow out the atmosphere! I'm Loving it!

Let's legalize a 3000-some family with clones and failed test subjects! Yeah.

Let's legalize clones and robots to lurk the cities undetected!

Let's leagalize feudalism, first come first serve, pick your castle and start killing people. Yeeeha! Blood is in the air.

Let's legalize nuking the oceans for FUN! Oh hell yeah!

Let's legalize liberals to kill all conservatives, for FREE! Tickets available at your local Oh-Bamastore.

Let's legalize the illegal alie.. errr unaccompanied children to rape your mother, pay no taxes, dictate your life, and eat the flesh of your starved-out dead grandma's body! Yuhu!

Let's legalize sex with babies! Fun For Everyone! Heil Satan!

Let's legalize the new world order! Kill 99% and turn the 1% into robots! Everybody WINS! Brought to you by Google-Darpa Incorporated, because morality is none of our business

What psychotherapy can do is bring to consciousness traumatic experiences that happened in childhood in such a way as to relieve and release all that psychic anxiety. There are ways one can heal.

 

[TerryMathews]

By quoting natural world observations regarding monogamy?

Yes, clearly monogamy and pair bonding is not actually prevalent in nature. Which is contrary to your assertion. There were even sources, those are what those little numbers are. You can read, right?

Poor moonie. Do your friends call you "Often Wrong"?

 

[alkemyst]

So you're against marriages involving two people of the same sex, but you're all for marriages that involve, say, three or more people of the same sex.

Totally credible.

He didn't think it through. lol.

 

[alkemyst]

It would be done in the name of Science


TIL of Starfish. A 60's US military experiment designed to see what would happen when a nuke was detonated 250 miles above Earth's magnetic pole. It resulted in an EMP 900 miles wide, an intense artificial aurora, and a radiation belt that disabled 1/3 of the low orbit satellites and lasted 5 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime

Most people don't realize even though this area was something anyone should have been able to fly or sail through, they would have been turned back if they tried it.

Total derail though to discuss this.