Should polygamy be legal?

  • 152 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for revan-
Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) 1 year, 6 months ago

Poll: Should polygamy be legal? (66 votes)

Yes 50%
No 42%
Results 8%

Do you think that people should be allowed to have more than one spouse? Would you have more than one, if given the chance? Would you marry me? Discuss, plz bby.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a93651393625
#151 Posted by deactivated-5a93651393625 (929 posts) - - Show Bio

Call me an old fashioned sexist but a man with multiple wives yes.

A woman with multiple husbands is gross.

Avatar image for revan-
#152 Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) - - Show Bio

@revan2424 said:
@ccraft said:

@dernman:

Maybe you don't care what people do in their personal lives, and neither do I, but when people try to redefine marriage and family, that effects the nation. I don't like that. Our nation was built on Judeo-Christian values, and we are losing what used to make us a great nation.

Funny enough, The US is the least Christian, Christian country. It was founded by Christians, with an anti-christian bill of rights, which directly contradicts the 10 commandments.

But our country has gradually been getting better, as our country becomes progressively less Christian. Hmm look at that.

How is the Bill of Rights anti-xian?

The first amendment allows freedom of religion. Something that is disallowed in the first commandmen.

Avatar image for revan-
#153 Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) - - Show Bio

@dernman said:
@revan2424 said:
@dernman said:
@revan2424 said:
lol

>calls me ignorant

>is dernman

>calls me a hypocrite

>is dernman

>talks about self awareness

>is dernman

>calls me a bigot

>is dernman

The pure irony in you noting my 'lack of self awareness' is astounding. Keep it up, hombre.

LOL

SO basically all you have is trolling that proves me right. Trying to project all the things you've been onto me.

Good job making your case. smh You've failed so hard on this one.

I think at this point all I have to do is sit back, laugh and let you make my case for me.

I just restated your points, and applied them to you. .

Which is called projecting.

Which was, incredibly accurate to exhibit your hypocrisy.

You're right it is incredibly accurate concerning you. Though you calling me a hypocrite implies an admission to all those things I accused you of. Damn you make this so fracking easy.

The difference here and you don't get is I don't have a problem with you not believing in god or religion. Why would I? I don't know if there is one. So that's a fail on your accusation. I'm not surprised it's easier for you want to believe that to sooth your bruised ego. Is it a throbbing pain or does it just stinging?

The one here who's said they have intolerance for other opinions here is you. Me on the other had have just addressed what you claimed, not as opinion but "facts" by saying any claim of fact needs to be proven. Which you still haven't done by the way. Even that was only after you refused and doubled down.

You're just mad now because you got called out on it especially when I stopped being nice and I enjoyed the hell out of it.

It worked. Cheers

Cheers because it worked for me. It helped in proving my point and has the added bonus of being fun when you do all the work for me. It's like you're trolling yourself. haha

OK I'm done. I'll have pity on you. Say whatever you want to try and make yourself feel better it doesn't matter anymore. The damage to you has already been done. There is no coming back from it. lol

Jesus, man, I'm getting obliterated.

Thank you for your ever so gracious pity. A true man of god.

Avatar image for revan-
#155 Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen: I say it's anti-Christian mainly because it was established by christians. It was their first doctrine in reducing the power of their religion, something that wasn't allowed in most other western christian countries.

Avatar image for redheathen
#157 Posted by RedHeathen (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen said:
@revan2424 said:
@ccraft said:

@dernman:

Maybe you don't care what people do in their personal lives, and neither do I, but when people try to redefine marriage and family, that effects the nation. I don't like that. Our nation was built on Judeo-Christian values, and we are losing what used to make us a great nation.

Funny enough, The US is the least Christian, Christian country. It was founded by Christians, with an anti-christian bill of rights, which directly contradicts the 10 commandments.

But our country has gradually been getting better, as our country becomes progressively less Christian. Hmm look at that.

How is the Bill of Rights anti-xian?

The first amendment allows freedom of religion. Something that is disallowed in the first commandmen.

so it's not necessarily anti-xian. it's kind of anti-many religions if we look at it from that point of view. it's anti-judaism, anti-islam, anti-any religion that says there is no other god or gods other than what is in that religion.

Avatar image for redheathen
#158 Posted by RedHeathen (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen: I say it's anti-Christian mainly because it was established by christians. It was their first doctrine in reducing the power of their religion, something that wasn't allowed in most other western christian countries.

sorry i had deleted my answer so i could update it, but i saw you replied so i reposted it without edits.

so, if that is the case then "we the people" is anti-christian as well, just the same as "all men are created equal" and other similar statements found in founding documents?

Avatar image for revan-
#159 Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen: No, those aren't. They don't contradict the main pillars of the religion.

Avatar image for redheathen
#160 Edited by RedHeathen (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

@revan2424 said:

@redheathen: No, those aren't. They don't contradict the main pillars of the religion.

So in other words, you only want Christians living in the US. ??? NOt just any xian, but the kind who believe exactly what you do.

Avatar image for revan-
#161 Posted by Revan- (7959 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen: What? What are you talking about? I'm against Christianity, and all other abrahamic religions religions. Where are you getting this from?

Avatar image for redheathen
#162 Edited by RedHeathen (2255 posts) - - Show Bio

@redheathen: What? What are you talking about? I'm against Christianity, and all other abrahamic religions religions. Where are you getting this from?

I don't mean to debate, but I get a bit irked when people want to claim the US is a xian nation. I mostly understand your pov, but like you, I'm just confused where you're getting your logic from. As for me:

The US is supposed to be a country for all people (supposed to be). It is supposed to be made up of We the People. It is supposed to be made up of people who are created equal, and taking all that into consideration and the intent even of the first amendment (there are writings that go along with most of the rights stating the intent of the amendments), I'm not sure how the first amendment is anti-Christian. And not everyone who signed the Constitution or ratified the amendments were Christian. Many were, but not all.

Also, it is intended for there to be a separation of church and state, which is found in the writings I just mentioned. Anyway, I don't intend to debate the topic, but I do think that it's important to note that many of the well known founding fathers were Deists, Unitarians, various skeptics and Freethinkers. This was the time of the Enlightenment, and the words we use today are not always perfectly synonymous with the meanings they held back then. These men include Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, Allen, Monroe, Washington, and importantly, Madison himself who is called the Writer (and the Father) of the Constitution and is author of the Bill of Rights. What I think is also important to note is that Paine and Allen were not truly Christian, yet they were allowed to participate in the development of and to sign the Constitution. In determining what faith a man believed in, I mostly rely on what that person has written and what has been verified to have been written by that person. I think it is another note worthy of attention that these men were willing to die in the fight for freedom and for the rights that a man was born with. natural rights/ inalienable rights -not all the same - some born with and some given by govt, but in large those given were considered to be inherent.

John Adams (2nd US president) recognized other religions when he wrote the Treaty of Tripoli, in which the 11th article reads:

As the Government of the United States…is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion–as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmen–and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Jefferson (personal writing):

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

Washington:

""The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for giving to Mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation,” wrote Washington. “All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens.”

The Federalist Papers are good to read to get a better understanding, and keep in mind that God and religion is never mentioned in the Constitution, which to me is indicative of intent. Perhaps to some of them xianity may have been preferred, maybe?, who knows?, but if so, they never mentioned it in the important documents that founded our nation. I'm kind of tired so am going to close here. I hope I didn't get off topic too much, and thanks for your input.

Avatar image for formosa
#163 Edited by Formosa (32 posts) - - Show Bio

Sure. I'm all for people having freedoms. If everyone consents, there shouldn't be a problem.