nehalem256
Lifer
- Apr 13, 2012
- 15,670
- 6
- 0
How do we know he does not make less than his wives and his planning to divorce them and rake in twice the alimony?If the dude wants twice the divorce fees let him. hes stimulating the economy.
How do we know he does not make less than his wives and his planning to divorce them and rake in twice the alimony?If the dude wants twice the divorce fees let him. hes stimulating the economy.
No different then women having kids by 2 or 3 different men, and drawing child support.How do we know he does not make less than his wives and his planning to divorce them and rake in twice the alimony?
That is where selective abortion comes into play.Aren't there more females than males on the planet, with a growing tendency to for the population to become increasingly female?
If so, then I expect things like this to happen more often than not...but probably after we are all dead. (Unless they start genetically engineering sexes of babies).
In the US, the religious institution of marriage was here before the legal institution of marriage. This is obvious since the government of the US is only 236 years old. Due to that, and the US Constitution explicitly barring the government from being in the religion business (which putting the force of law behind the religious institution violates) the US is in a different position from many nations. This is why I support removing government from marriage altogether and having the US government only issuing civil unions to all.Something I never will understand is why religious groups pitch such a fit when people get married in a way outside of their view. Marriage isn't a religious invention. The concept has existed in every culture in history, religious and not. Just because they ALSO have marriage doesn't mean they have the right to dictate how people not within their religion get married. It'd be like if Catholics start screaming about how other people drink wine and eat crackers.
Without selective abortions, wars, and general excessive violence (of which males are usually the cause and recipients of) there would still be more females than males. The X sperm are more resistant to the acidic nature of the womb and the Y sperm, so more X sperm survive and be in good condition to make it to the egg...giving them a higher chance to fertilize it. If I remember correctly, the natural ratio is 52 - 48 female-male.Aren't there more females than males on the planet, with a growing tendency to for the population to become increasingly female?
If so, then I expect things like this to happen more often than not...but probably after we are all dead. (Unless they start genetically engineering sexes of babies).
I guess your book isn't the Bible. Polygamy was allowed in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament only church leaders had to be monogamous.Doesn't matter to me how many people they want to have in a relationship, but that isn't a marriage in my book. A marriage is between one man and one woman. Other relationships are fine by me, but I'll never see them as a marriage.
I guess your book isn't the Bible. Polygamy was allowed in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament only church leaders had to be monogamous.