all forms of polygamy contribute to the discrimination of women and the sexualisation of young girls

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by megabyte

 

I am not suggesting you do.

I am suggesting that you don't realize that by pretending that these people's children should be abandonned to their parents vision of education that you are sure to be re-enforcing the entire lifestyle and the cultish nature of it. You are also assuring they continue to have a brainwashed uneducated source of girls on which to increase their population.

You can't ignore the consquences of other's choices, even if you don't like their choices.

What does this have to do with someone having multiple spouses?

I think you're getting a little too worked up about this.

BTW saying that you have 2 exs that are in polyandrous/polyamorous relationships doesn't exactly serve you justice. It makes you look like s piteful sociopath at best. "Look, here's what I think, and here's some bias to show you what selfish nonsense makes me think that way".

Did you have anything real to contribute to this argument or are you just going to label it cultish and insult the tradition and act like what you do is infinitely better because its not what your exs do?

Singing hymns from yonder year in a congregation full of people swaying and occasionally shouting " woooaAAAAH!!!! The holy spirit IS INSIDE OF ME!?>!?!!!11!!1! yushnama hoobuttsa coolatamufafafafafa rrrreeeeeeeeeyayayayaya!"

.... that seems a hell of a lot more cultish to me. Guess it should be illegal.

Jussayin'.

reply to post by Aeons


While there is no doubt that you lie, I think there is a bigger problem, and that is you exhibit numerous symptoms of sociopathy.

Seriously, have you ever had a mental health screening?

Are you really trying to splice the difference between marriage and having children, and denying that having children by the lot load is one of the primary focuses of the vast majority of the practioners of this lifestyle here?

You can try as much as you like to splice the difference between the practice and insulating religions which are practicing it and make up the majority of practioners here. They don't.

I am not a fan of polygamy. Nor am I a fan of polyandry. You may rest assured this stance annoys several people I know. It annoys them more because they can't use the argument "you don't know...." most of all.

I think focusing on these two issues is the wrong tactic for the government to take. I'd like to see them take a solid aim at the CONSEQUENCES of the problematic behaviour. Not only is this not likely to fail a run at the Supremes, it clearly makes in roads into these compounds to assure equal access to and for all Canadian children.

The lame schooling that many people in this lifestyle try to defend is a travesty. The insulating of those children to the point that they cannot function outside of their group is a clear manipulation to undermine those children. It is unacceptable. And it is ABSOLUTELY entwinned with their practice of polygamy.

While the very small minority of people who are in and defending polygamy outside of the bounds of these ultra-controlling religious groups try to cut the difference, by ignoring the aggravating factors of the practice they are not being fully truthful.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
reply to post by Aeons

 

While there is no doubt that you lie, I think there is a bigger problem, and that is you exhibit numerous symptoms of sociopathy.

Seriously, have you ever had a mental health screening?

I give you permission to look into any of those claims. My family genealogy is online. I'd be able to figure out who I am - if you are smart enough so can you. I assure you a few other people have managed to find me. Recently even.

I am not lying. And I really am just a working class mom. There is no special prize for finding me.

To link the people to the groups I've specified you'll have to do a bit more digging, but it isn't impossible. I even gave you the particulars to look into the Conradt line of Nova Scotia. Easy breezy for you to prove me a liar right there. Hell, I gave you gang names that are SO ridiculous that surely you can prove I'm lying by proving they never existed.

I didn't change my last name upon marriage. My last name is the same as the people I've identified. You find any of those people, and you can find me eventually. See I even provide triangulation for you. There are enough people I listed that if you find their names, you'll find my last name.

Prove me wrong. Go ahead. I give you permission.

Hey, equal opportunity right? Isn't that what that homosexual brigade is always claiming?

If you can marry another man, why can't a man marry 14 women? One is no more valid a lifestyle than another.

End of story.

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Hey, equal opportunity right? Isn't that what that homosexual brigade is always claiming?

If you can marry another man, why can't a man marry 14 women? One is no more valid a lifestyle than another.

End of story.

My main problem with the laws about same gendered marriage is the same problem I have here.

The same gender marriage laws give far broader parental definitions to people in those relationships. Far broader than in a traditional marriage. And vastly broader upon divorce and re-marriage.

Differences are pertinent.

Originally posted by Aeons
Are you really trying to splice the difference between marriage and having children, and denying that having children by the lot load is one of the primary focuses of the vast majority of the practioners of this lifestyle here?

Um, not everyone thinks the same, I'm not sure if you knew that. Many people have contempt even for the thought of children. Yes, you're right. I am most definitely going to deny.... this ignorant nonsense. What you're trying to say is that procreation is the meaning of life? The meaning of relationships? I feel sorry for your husband if the only reason you are with him is for his member so that you can pump out some afterbirth. That sounds like a functional monogamous relationship.

You can try as much as you like to splice the difference between the practice and insulating religions which are practicing it and make up the majority of practioners here. They don't.

That explains their huge homosexual population compared to ours... .

I should probably point out.... that was sarcasm.

I am not a fan of polygamy. Nor am I a fan of polyandry. You may rest assured this stance annoys several people I know. It annoys them more because they can't use the argument "you don't know...." most of all.

No, but they could say, you're biased and not thinking clearly because you have a chip on your shoulder. Sometimes we surround ourselves with idiots for fun, though.

I think focusing on these two issues is the wrong tactic for the government to take. I'd like to see them take a solid aim at the CONSEQUENCES of the problematic behaviour. Not only is this not likely to fail a run at the Supremes, it clearly makes in roads into these compounds to assure equal access to and for all Canadian children.

Ugh.

I suggest you look up divorce rates among monogamous relationships, then divorce rates among polygamous relationships....

...Then the correlation between parental separation, child depression, child psychosis, and child suicide....

...Then get back to me with your shallow "save the children" argument...

The lame schooling that many people in this lifestyle try to defend is a travesty.

And then there's some of us... not to be mentioned... who argue about things that they aren't even educated on, and then go around bashing uneducated people. Sound familiar?

The insulating of those children to the point that they cannot function outside of their group is a clear manipulation to undermine those children. It is unacceptable. And it is ABSOLUTELY entwinned with their practice of polygamy.

Sorry, I didn't know if you were talking about polygamy or monogamy until I read the last word.

While the very small minority of people who are in and defending polygamy outside of the bounds of these ultra-controlling religious groups try to cut the difference, by ignoring the aggravating factors of the practice they are not being fully truthful.

Um, so what you're saying is that... Unless you label everything and do your thinking based on the things that you have labeled... you are not being fully truthful? That's interesting. Especially coming from someone who instantly links polygamy to arranged marriages.

Seriously, sweetheart; you evidently don't know what you're talking about. Get over it.

Just because you would not choose to be in a polyandrous/polyamorous relationship doesn't mean that other people should be raped of that choice. Not everyone is religious -- some of us like to do our own thinking, thanks.

Twist and turn. Splice and Dice. Drilling down to see if you can make me look like a big meany while refusing to drill down on the argument itself.

While you can continue to do so - the fact is that you are lying to yourself if you don't realize that this is the point that most people who have significant problems with polygamy have with it.

Originally posted by Aeons
Twist and turn. Splice and Dice. Drilling down to see if you can make me look like a big meany while refusing to drill down on the argument itself.

While you can continue to do so - the fact is that you are lying to yourself if you don't realize that this is the point that most people who have significant problems with polygamy have with it.

Seriously - - I have no problem seeing your viewpoint/opinion.

However - - its only one side viewpoint/opinion of a lifestyle/belief. I would guess - - statistically - - from our vast population that there are many many multiple marriage groupings going on that are not of a religious nature - - or documented in some kind of calculated census.

Your "know-it-all" knowledge is based on - - well your own personal knowledge. Which of course is limited to - - your own experiences and hearsay from your own family/acquaintances - - acquaintances/family - - etc.

Yes - - it would appear on the surface that the vast majority of multiple marriages are religious based - - and fall victim to the suppression of religious belief.

However - - religious suppression (mostly in relationship to females) - - really has nothing to do with multiple marriage.

I would think it is quite clear to anyone with an open minded brain - - - that the current issues in the case of Warren Jeffs - - - exceeds the minor situation of polygamy.

What is the difference between polygamous and monogymous relationships? How about we add in homosexual?

None of it matters.

As long as the relationships are formed between consenting adults, not my business, do what makes you happy.

When children are concerned, again, what is the difference?

I am in a hetero monogamous relationship. I can still groom my children to be nothing more than breeding stock. I can also groom them to be responsible, intellectual, racist, etc. I can teach them what ever I wish.

As can a polygamous or homosexual, or whatever comes next, parent.

I would bet dollars to donuts that if you did a study in 50 years, you will find the same number of idiot parents spread across all relationship types equally.

I had to watch "Sister Wives" specifically because I was originally horrified by publicizing (IMHO "normalizing") polygamy. I was quite shocked when one daughter told the "new" mom that she was looking forward to nice MONOGAMOUS relationship when she was older. Really broke my little bubble about the whole grooming the girls for other polygamists.

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Hey, equal opportunity right? Isn't that what that homosexual brigade is always claiming?

If you can marry another man, why can't a man marry 14 women? One is no more valid a lifestyle than another.

End of story.

My main problem with the laws about same gendered marriage is the same problem I have here.

The same gender marriage laws give far broader parental definitions to people in those relationships. Far broader than in a traditional marriage. And vastly broader upon divorce and re-marriage.

Differences are pertinent.

What?!?!?

Let me be blunt - - - you try to present yourself as superior in knowledge and understanding.

What you just stated - - - makes no sense in any logical argument/debate.

Try again - - - in simple language.

Originally posted by Aeons
Twist and turn. Splice and Dice. Drilling down to see if you can make me look like a big meany while refusing to drill down on the argument itself.

While you can continue to do so - the fact is that you are lying to yourself if you don't realize that this is the point that most people who have significant problems with polygamy have with it.

What a beautiful rebuttal to something you clearly never read.

No use talking with your type. It's like arguing with an encyclopedia, the way you know everything about a given topic, and how you conveniently have a life experience for every topic you engage in. The one you chose this time is that you know what polygamy is... your exs are in polyandrous/poly-amorous relationships. Yes, well, my sister doesn't like Jews because her ex is a Jewish lawyer who left her with nothing. I guess Jews are bad. My sister knows Jews.

Belgian waffles suck. I hate Germany.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Hey, equal opportunity right? Isn't that what that homosexual brigade is always claiming?

If you can marry another man, why can't a man marry 14 women? One is no more valid a lifestyle than another.

End of story.

My main problem with the laws about same gendered marriage is the same problem I have here.

The same gender marriage laws give far broader parental definitions to people in those relationships. Far broader than in a traditional marriage. And vastly broader upon divorce and re-marriage.

Differences are pertinent.

What?!?!?

Let me be blunt - - - you try to present yourself as superior in knowledge and understanding.

What you just stated - - - makes no sense in any logical argument/debate.

Try again - - - in simple language.

No, I have presented myself as someone who has intentionally gone out of my way to put myself in a place where I could see this practice up close and personal. An argumentation point used most often by people defending themselves is the good ol' "Nobody Knows Me." Well, I know you.

There is a serious problem, and it is linked more than casually.

You can argue the gap all you want. Until you address the problem, it isn't going away.

reply to post by Brood


I have gone out of my way to put myself in numerous places and groups to see what they are from their own point of view. To love them as they love themselves. I have no doubt that you and many others have a hard time with the idea that I could have all these "experiences." I doubt most people have intentionally pursued a course of actions like that. Doesn't mean you couldn't.

Originally posted by peck420
What is the difference between polygamous and monogamous relationships? How about we add in homosexual?

None of it matters.

As long as the relationships are formed between consenting adults, not my business, do what makes you happy.

Thank you Peck! Excellently stated.

I am in a 21 year marriage with a man 21 years younger then me. Actually he is only 1 year older then my oldest child. From the beginning I have encouraged him to be on the "aware" of a sister wife. He is an amazing human being - - and I do not want him hooking up with a "Heather Mills" - - if you know what I mean.

I would prefer to help choose and/or select my replacement (so to speak). This is an incredible man who was raised by his grandparents - - from Swedish farm stock - - that considered a mans word his bond. You just don't find this kind of integrity often in today's world.

It is especially apparent right now - - - as I must spend 2 to 3 weeks at a time living with my daughter - - being nanny to my soon-to-be 3 year old grandson who's father died of Leukemia.

I would feel truly blessed if my husband found a "sister wife" - - - to take care of him and our home - - - while I am away - - doing/being what takes priority.

Our only rule is: he must be fully honest about the situation.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Brood

 

I have gone out of my way to put myself in numerous places and groups to see what they are from their own point of view. To love them as they love themselves. I have no doubt that you and many others have a hard time with the idea that I could have all these "experiences." I doubt most people have intentionally pursued a course of actions like that. Doesn't mean you couldn't.

I have no doubt at all.

You - however - seem to have predisposition before going in.

You seem to approach with pre-judgment.

Originally posted by Aeons
You can argue the gap all you want. Until you address the problem, it isn't going away.

...the only significant problem i see is - people sticking their nose into other people's biz, especially the snooty ones who want the government to intervene / persecute people who dont live as the snooty ones think everyone should...

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Brood

 

I have gone out of my way to put myself in numerous places and groups to see what they are from their own point of view. To love them as they love themselves. I have no doubt that you and many others have a hard time with the idea that I could have all these "experiences." I doubt most people have intentionally pursued a course of actions like that. Doesn't mean you couldn't.

I have no doubt at all.

You - however - seem to have predisposition before going in.

You seem to approach with pre-judgment.

I don't suspend my capacity to see and form opinions based on actions and consequences. That's true.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks

Originally posted by Aeons
You can argue the gap all you want. Until you address the problem, it isn't going away.

...the only significant problem i see is - people sticking their nose into other people's biz, especially the snooty ones who want the government to intervene / persecute people who dont live as the snooty ones think everyone should...

Deal honestly with real problems, and your issue with optics will correct itself.

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks

Originally posted by Aeons
You can argue the gap all you want. Until you address the problem, it isn't going away.

...the only significant problem i see is - people sticking their nose into other people's biz, especially the snooty ones who want the government to intervene / persecute people who dont live as the snooty ones think everyone should...

Deal honestly with real problems, and your issue with optics will correct itself.

Oh WOW!!!!!

More Rhetoric!!!!!