Page:
Polygamy
HHMCameron
BetaWolfinVA
Forum Posts: 315
BetaWolfinVA
Fire of Insight
4
Joined 17th Oct 2014 Forum Posts: 315
Currently there are a lot of issues with polygamy, or polygamists
the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS) {as opposed to the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints that follows the laws of the land}
1: has issues with LDS, City/County, State, and Federal Authority stemming from the LDS disavowing polygamy near the time of Utah State Hood (in the wake of Mountain Meadows, the LDS were kinda addicted to breathing...)
2: Takes Advantage of the Welfare Laws not allowing for "unwed" extra spouses reporting of the patriarchs income... (current{?} fraud case) allegations that these unneeded payments are then forwarded to the church leadership
3: Allocates additional spouses on the basis of donations to the church (hence point #2)
4: Warren Jeffs, the Former/Current/? FLDS leader is currently serving time for Officiating and Participating in Child Marriage
Contrast that with the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB) of the "sister wives" group.
allegations of Point #2 above
Also, immigrants & refugees from Polygamous Countries or countries with polygamous cultures are alleged to state that they do not (currently) practice polygamy as a condition of entry, and bring have the extra spouses immigrate on their own, and then the extra spouses take advantage of the welfare system.
If polygamy (both polygyny, polyandry, and mixed) and common law polygamy (in common law marriage states) were recognized, then many of these abuses would be virtually eliminated. (marriage licenses, etc.), and the extra spouses would then be granted the same protections as other spouses, and welfare applications would take into account the income of the entire family, and not just the income of the woman in question.
Personal Experience long since over has me thinking that polygamy should be recognized, if only to curb the abuses, but I sincerely doubt that it would not give me any benefit today (but in 2003-2004...)
the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS) {as opposed to the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints that follows the laws of the land}
1: has issues with LDS, City/County, State, and Federal Authority stemming from the LDS disavowing polygamy near the time of Utah State Hood (in the wake of Mountain Meadows, the LDS were kinda addicted to breathing...)
2: Takes Advantage of the Welfare Laws not allowing for "unwed" extra spouses reporting of the patriarchs income... (current{?} fraud case) allegations that these unneeded payments are then forwarded to the church leadership
3: Allocates additional spouses on the basis of donations to the church (hence point #2)
4: Warren Jeffs, the Former/Current/? FLDS leader is currently serving time for Officiating and Participating in Child Marriage
Contrast that with the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB) of the "sister wives" group.
allegations of Point #2 above
Also, immigrants & refugees from Polygamous Countries or countries with polygamous cultures are alleged to state that they do not (currently) practice polygamy as a condition of entry, and bring have the extra spouses immigrate on their own, and then the extra spouses take advantage of the welfare system.
If polygamy (both polygyny, polyandry, and mixed) and common law polygamy (in common law marriage states) were recognized, then many of these abuses would be virtually eliminated. (marriage licenses, etc.), and the extra spouses would then be granted the same protections as other spouses, and welfare applications would take into account the income of the entire family, and not just the income of the woman in question.
Personal Experience long since over has me thinking that polygamy should be recognized, if only to curb the abuses, but I sincerely doubt that it would not give me any benefit today (but in 2003-2004...)
chump
Forum Posts: 417
Thought Provoker
6
Joined 30th Sep 2014Forum Posts: 417
I'm in favor of a $5 license to orgy..
Jehrnstrom34
Joined 26th Nov 2016
Forum Posts: 6
Strange Creature
Forum Posts: 6
Polygamy is about as unheard of as abortion to even the most moderate of Christians. As long as they're the majority, polygamy will probably not be recognized as valid. (Although, I do believe Utah recognizes polygamist ideals due to a majority of Mormons, that could be factually inaccurate.)
RevolutionAL
Alistair Plint
Forum Posts: 1257
Alistair Plint
Dangerous Mind
29
Joined 24th July 2012Forum Posts: 1257
The president of my country Jacob Zuma has 6 wives.
You'd imagine our country to be fairly Polygamist
Why is it unaceptable then for a women to have multiple husbands?
That is where I claim that for a country that claims to believe in freedom and equity. We are stupid assholes.
You'd imagine our country to be fairly Polygamist
Why is it unaceptable then for a women to have multiple husbands?
That is where I claim that for a country that claims to believe in freedom and equity. We are stupid assholes.
Grace
IDryad
Forum Posts: 16073
IDryad
Tyrant of Words
122
Joined 25th Aug 2011Forum Posts: 16073
In my country the Muslims are allowed 4 wives. As long as the man can afford it physically and financially. The man however have to have written permissions from the first wife to marry a second one...and so on and so forth.
RevolutionAL
Alistair Plint
Forum Posts: 1257
Alistair Plint
Dangerous Mind
29
Joined 24th July 2012Forum Posts: 1257
Grace said:In my country the Muslims are allowed 4 wives. As long as the man can afford it physically and financially. The man however have to have written permissions from the first wife to marry a second one...and so on and so forth.
That's interesting, so does that rule apply to Muslims only?
Is that not prejudice based on religious choice. There we go Miss Grace lets coin the word "religionism"
That's interesting, so does that rule apply to Muslims only?
Is that not prejudice based on religious choice. There we go Miss Grace lets coin the word "religionism"
Anonymous
I've been alive for like thirty odd years now, and I have to say that the subject of polygamy has never really entered my mental space. Maybe it's an English thing - have I ever met another polygamist? Never. I live in a very monogamous country, hellbent on family values (though we're pretty relaxed about the gays, so that's all good with me)
I can totally see the benefits of polygamy, even down to a person's mental wellbeing. I'm not entirely convinced that human beings were ever truly made to be monogamous... could I practice that myself? I'm not sure I could, but that's on an honest level of myself.
What I don't like is the connotations of gender in polygamy. You always hear of a man having 12 wives or whatever... but when you think of the women, they get labelled desperate or money grabbing or even dare I say, whorish... and that's what kind of annoys me about the whole thing. It's a one sided argument.
I can totally see the benefits of polygamy, even down to a person's mental wellbeing. I'm not entirely convinced that human beings were ever truly made to be monogamous... could I practice that myself? I'm not sure I could, but that's on an honest level of myself.
What I don't like is the connotations of gender in polygamy. You always hear of a man having 12 wives or whatever... but when you think of the women, they get labelled desperate or money grabbing or even dare I say, whorish... and that's what kind of annoys me about the whole thing. It's a one sided argument.
Grace
IDryad
Forum Posts: 16073
IDryad
Tyrant of Words
122
Joined 25th Aug 2011Forum Posts: 16073
RevolutionAL said:
That's interesting, so does that rule apply to Muslims only?
Is that not prejudice based on religious choice. There we go Miss Grace lets coin the word "religionism"
Yes only for Muslims. For us non-Muslim its not allowed at all. To 'have and to hold' is the fundemental of most marriages among natives here although the occasional divorce occur.
That's interesting, so does that rule apply to Muslims only?
Is that not prejudice based on religious choice. There we go Miss Grace lets coin the word "religionism"
Yes only for Muslims. For us non-Muslim its not allowed at all. To 'have and to hold' is the fundemental of most marriages among natives here although the occasional divorce occur.
Astyanax
Ceejay
Forum Posts: 748
Ceejay
Fire of Insight
9
Joined 23rd Feb 2010Forum Posts: 748
Never really saw the point of polygamy. I can understand one guy wanting to have relationships with lots of women, but why marry them all? Is it to do with an exaggerated sense of ownership? It also seems a very expensive and complicated way to live your life. By the same token, polyandry has similar drawbacks, though some much-married film-stars and celebrities (Liz Taylor and Frank Sinatra spring to mind) seem to go in for polyandry and polygamy, but one at a time. I think what it really comes down to is having a short attention-span.
HHMCameron
BetaWolfinVA
Forum Posts: 315
BetaWolfinVA
Fire of Insight
4
Joined 17th Oct 2014 Forum Posts: 315
@Jehrnstrom34 the Mainstream Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (LDS) follows the law of the land, and polygamy was (publicly) given up when Utah statehood was granted
The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS), the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB), and other offshoots of the LDS practice polygamy.
The FLDS is what people think of when they think of Mormon polygamy in the united states, and they have the worst abuses as well (child marriage {18th century mores}, church arranged marriage {the more attractive wives assigned to those that donate the most to the church}, welfare fraud {actual economics of the household not being taken into account, because only the income of the "unwed mother" is taken into account by the government})
as to Christian polygamy, up to the 5th century it can be said that polygamy was a rare practice in Christianity
The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS), the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB), and other offshoots of the LDS practice polygamy.
The FLDS is what people think of when they think of Mormon polygamy in the united states, and they have the worst abuses as well (child marriage {18th century mores}, church arranged marriage {the more attractive wives assigned to those that donate the most to the church}, welfare fraud {actual economics of the household not being taken into account, because only the income of the "unwed mother" is taken into account by the government})
as to Christian polygamy, up to the 5th century it can be said that polygamy was a rare practice in Christianity
HHMCameron
BetaWolfinVA
Forum Posts: 315
BetaWolfinVA
Fire of Insight
4
Joined 17th Oct 2014 Forum Posts: 315
@Miss_Sub
what we hear about polygamy is really Polygyny (one man, more than one woman)
polygamy would allow also for polyandry (one woman, more than one man) or more balanced plural marriage without an interesting name
what we hear about polygamy is really Polygyny (one man, more than one woman)
polygamy would allow also for polyandry (one woman, more than one man) or more balanced plural marriage without an interesting name