Homosexuals - Polygamists?
452020
Because polygamy is WRONG.  Marriage is about commitment between two people, not three, four, or five.  And there's nothing wrong with homosexuality.  I think they have as much a right to get married as anybody else, as long as its only to ONE person!
1008571
Let's start with some background information.  Polygamy exists in three specific forms, including polygyny (one man having multiple wives), polyandry (one woman having multiple husbands), or group marriage (some combination of polygyny and polyandry). Historically, all three practices have been found, but polygyny is by far the most common.\n\nIn America the Mormon religion is the most famous for polygamy.  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints practiced polygamy in the United States and referred to it as "plural marriage".  Polygamy among these groups persists today in Utah, neighboring states, and the spin-off colonies, as well as among isolated individuals with no organized church affiliation. Polygamist churches of Mormon origin are called "Mormon fundamentalist". According to one source, there are as many as 37,000 Mormon fundamentalists, with less than half of them living in polygamous households.  Most of the polygamy is believed to be restricted to about a dozen extended groups of polygamous Mormon fundamentalists.\n\nWith this one example, proof that polygamy is not immoral to the entire world.
1125692
Just one thing?\n\nWell, aside from the basis of the Religion itself, the "vision" by Joseph Smith that started it all, it would definitley be the view on polygamy they held for so long, and then suddenly dropped.\n\nOh yea, the poster above me has another good one.
1186826
You've made a valid point to a logical end with just one simple question.\n\nTry telling that to the Breeder's, those who are hate-filled, that is.  They won't (can't?) accept it.  It seems that logic in some doesn't appear to be even a minor predisposition.  Go figure.\n\nEDIT:  For zain15in (see below) --\n\nEvery point you made can be equally applied to heterosexual's, and most likely SHOULD be, since the vast majority of child sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by people such as yourself (assuming you are a heterosexual and not asexual).\nIndeed, you posit good arguments against YOUR culture but not ours.\n\nAdditionally, most of your ilk argue that homosexuality is found nowhere else in the natural world.  I'm quite certain the respondent who mentioned that homosexual pairings (not same-sex sex) in the animal kingdom (sans homosapiens) is merely a refute to that tired and baseless argument.\n\nRegarding your comment that homosexuality is a deviation:  I'm certain it is...for those of your ilk.  My view about heterosexuality is that IT is a deviation.  But, such as yours, it is only MY view and holds no great merit.  We are two individuals.  No more and no less.  Well .... except that we, the GLBT community as a whole, have the upper hand in this argument and YOUR war against US is on the wane.  Delude yourself no more.  Accept reality, my good friend.  Accept reality.  As you've stated, we've been here for a very long time.\n\nWe're not leaving any time soon.
448899
I am a cultural relativist, so I see no reason to judge other cultures poorly if they have a tradition of polygamy. They have their own reasons for doing it. Historically, polygamy has been far more widespread than monogamy. It's still practiced by some cultures today. If you look, most of them come from areas where survival is difficult, and it's easier to survive and to reproduce if you have multiple wives. I'd also like to point out that, although there aren't nearly as many, there are also a few cultures where the wives have multiple husbands. Again, you can usually see environmental reasons for it.\n\nPersonally, I don't understand most people in this country who consider themselves poly, because it always seems to me that there's a "third wheel" who doesn't get as much attention as one of the other partners. But if that's their thing, that's their thing. Maybe it works fine for them and I simply can't understand from an outsider's perspective. I really think the most important thing is: are the people in the situation happy, and is anyone being hurt by it? If the answer to the first question is yes, and the second one no, then it's all good.
350882
i doubt that the relegions or sects allowing polygamy insist that one have to be polygamous. islam allow 4 wives but even it never says that it is must to have four wives. none of my muslim friends have more than one spouse though there are many who do. i never heard that those monogamous muslims are declare false muslims for it.
895236
Let's okay gay marriages.  Then let's okay polygamous marriages. Then let's okay pedophiles marriage with children.  And we can okay cross dressers to marry themselves.  We don't want anyone to feel left out.  That wouldn't be fair.
998807
HE he he !  Have a lookie at my anser to your question!  I drove the local preachQ -- What are your views on Christian Polygamy. It seems OK because the\n Bible does not prohibit it.\n\n\n((((A -- A difficult question to answer in a few words. Let me answer your question by \nsupplying with a short research paper that is downloadable to paper.)))) \n\n\n\nHistorical Polygamyers out of their tree showing them my research!
697813
It is a matter of record that some of the OT people had many wives. But what is recorded in the Bible should not be confused with what is approved and commended in the Bible. Polygamy was never God's original intention for man.
333795
Peace on you …. Thank you for asking about my religion.\n1. Definition of Polygamy\nPolygamy means a system of marriage whereby one person has more than one\nspouse. Polygamy can be of two types. One is polygyny where a man marries\nmore than one woman, and the other is polyandry, where a woman marries\nmore than one man. In Islam, limited polygyny is permitted; whereas polyandry\nis completely prohibited.\nNow coming to the original question, why is a man allowed to have more than\none wife?\n2. The Qur’an is the only religious scripture in the world that says,\n“marry only one”.\nThe Qur’an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the\nphrase ‘marry only one’. There is no other religious book that instructs men to\nhave only one wife. In none of the other religious scriptures, whether it be the\nVedas, the Ramayan, the Mahabharat, the Geeta, the Talmud or the Bible does\none find a restriction on the number of wives. According to these scriptures one\ncan marry as many as one wishes. It was only later, that the Hindu priests and\nthe Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one.\nMany Hindu religious personalities, according to their scriptures, had multiple\nwives. King Dashrat, the father of Rama, had more than one wife. Krishna had\nseveral wives.\nIn earlier times, Christian men were permitted as many wives as they wished,\nsince the Bible puts no restriction on the number of wives. It was only a few\ncenturies ago that the Church restricted the number of wives to one.\nPolygyny is permitted in Judaism. According to Talmudic law, Abraham had\nthree wives, and Solomon had hundreds of wives. The practice of polygyny\ncontinued till Rabbi Gershom ben Yehudah (960 C.E to 1030 C.E) issued an\nedict against it. The Jewish Sephardic communities living in Muslim countries\ncontinued the practice till as late as 1950, until an Act of the Chief Rabbinate of\nIsrael extended the ban on marrying more than one wife.\n(*Interesting Note:- As per the 1975 census of India Hindus are more\npolygynous than Muslims. The report of the ‘Committee of The Status of\nWoman in Islam’, published in 1975 mentions on page numbers 66 and 67 that\nthe percentage of polygamous marriages between the years 1951 and 1961\nwas 5.06% among the Hindus and only 4.31% among the Muslims. According\nto Indian law only Muslim men are permitted to have more than one wife. It is\nillegal for any non-Muslim in India to have more than one wife. Despite it being\nillegal, Hindus have more multiple wives as compared to Muslims. Earlier, there\nwas no restriction even on Hindu men with respect to the number of wives\nallowed. It was only in 1954, when the Hindu Marriage Act was passed that it\nbecame illegal for a Hindu to have more than one wife. At present it is the Indian\nLaw that restricts a Hindu man from having more than one wife and not the\nHindu scriptures.)\nLet us now analyse why Islam allows a man to have more than one wife.\n3. Qur’an permits limited polygyny\nAs I mentioned earlier, Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth\nthat says ‘marry only one’. The context of this phrase is the following verse from\nSurah Nisa of the Glorious Qur’an:\n“Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that\nye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.”\n[Al-Qur’an 4:3]\nBefore the Qur’an was revealed, there was no upper limit for polygyny and\nmany men had scores of wives, some even hundreds. Islam put an upper limit\nof four wives. Islam gives a man permission to marry two, three or four women,\nonly on the condition that he deals justly with them.\nIn the same chapter i.e. Surah Nisa verse 129 says:\n“Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women....”\n[Al-Qur’an 4:129]\nTherefore polygyny is not a rule but an exception. Many people are under the\nmisconception that it is compulsory for a Muslim man to have more than one
1020183
You are correct.  The arguement of 'natural attraction' is not by itself an acceptable reason for unusual sexual behavior.\n\nHomosexuality is tolerated because it is between two consenting adults.  Unlike attraction to children, rape, or bestiality which doesn't get the consent of the other party.\n\nI do wonder why those in favor of homosexuality are against all polygamy.  In both cases it's relationships between consenting adults.   It seems inconsistent to me.
23886
It might lead to it in the long run, polygamists might eventually get the court precidence if gay marriage goes through. Legally speaking, it could easily happpen. There really hasn't been "homosexual marriage" in history, but there have been hundreds of societal examples of it being extremely common, and expected, valued, and practiced - the greeks, the spartans, the japanese, etc. It has only been considered 'unnatural' in some western cultures over the past 1,000 years or so. In many cultures, it has only become 'unnatural' in the last 200 years or less, and that is simply because of Western ideals being imported.
988884
An interesting question...with so many contentious answers.\n\nPolygamy is made into a moral issue by the multiple religious institutions around the world...and the laws against polygamy are rooted more in religious reasonings than ones based in economical or societal ones.  The laws could be changed....but it would take a super-majority of US citizens to do so, and it's highly unlikely that the religious right would ever allow such an event to take place.\n\nOne wife is more than enough for me personally...but I say if you're man (or woman) enough...who am I to say differently. \n\nJust my 2 cents worth.
371252
I'm LDS, and I'm proud!  \nI have been looking around a bit, and I think that the lies that are posted are outragous!  I mean, if someone asks a question about us LDS people, how about you let US LDS people answer them?  We are the ones who live the religion (it's not a cult, and we don't have communes, etc.), and we are the ones who go to church each week.  Most of the sites that people are reffering to are full of lies!  It's sickening.  If anybody wants to know what we REALLY believe, you can go to www.mormon.ORG, or www.lds.ORG.  Check your facts with LDS people folks, not quasi-religious polygamist cults using the name of our church.
1060586
It's not legal, but it is practiced...\n\n"secretive society" that dominates Colorado City and Hildale, Utah, where many of the 8,000 residents practice polygamy."\n\nThey are from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
773878
Wrote a few points in this group post I have.  I essentially argue for both sides on theological, philisophical, and practical point of view.  I don't think scientific point of view helps much.  Scientists are still looking for the 'gay' gene, and there are still no definite proof of homosexuality, in humans, that is.\n\n\nXR
684904
Polygamy is against the law.  The government has every right to disfranchise them.\n\nRegards,\n-Jim