Same sex marriage & Polygamy

Tools    





Check it out! Rufnek is a playa! I knew I liked you. Now more than ever.
__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...



The California Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage.



Your opinions?
Yay or nay to same sex marriage?

What's the problem with calling it "marriage" btw?
I'm all for same sex marriage. Why shouldn't the gays be just as miserable as the rest of us?



Check it out! Rufnek is a playa! I knew I liked you. Now more than ever.
At the risk of disappointing you, it's more like "was a playa." I quit playing around at about 63-64 and am now with the one love of my life. An old geezer still out running the clubs just looks foolish. On the plus side, I no longer have to worry about getting fat.

Still, what memories!



OK, now that Fufneck has come out it is my turn

Umm Errr I was in a relationship with 2 men for 11yrs, they both knew about each other and liked each other We whet to a Wedding together once, I sat between the 2 of them, I was such a scandle Men couldn't understand it and woman envied me
I am not with either man now but good friends with both, we talk on the phone a lot and have coffee often.
__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha



Well, mine is a little more boring, because they all knew about each other, and they knew it was ONLY going out to have fun. No sex . . . period. There were eight of them at one time, but two split pretty fast, once they realized the sex rule. I juggled six for over three months. I was simply tired of crappy relationships, and decided to try this, and see how it went. It was fun. It was also frustrating at times, but mostly fun.
I am not one to sleep with more than one person, so I can't imagine this polygamy being a good thing. I also can't believe a man would "truly" love me, be in love with me, if he can share that with another.
If I wouldn't want my children doing it, then I don't agree with it. That is how I decide on things. This is one big "Hell no!"
Christine, would you mind your child doing this?



If that makes sense, then why haven't women ever been allowed to take multiple husbands in locations and times where men have outnumbered women, as was often the case in the West on the US Frontier, in Texas both when it was part of Mexico and during its days as a Republic, in Australia during its early settlement? Only in a movie, Paint Your Wagon.
Because in the example the guy gave me it was after centuries of war...not a gold rush or something else that was carried out by choice by a culture that already had most of it's ground rules in place...and be honest, the need to boost your population would not be best served by the 1 woman + multiple men method would it?

As for your friend's explanation, that's just another version of the old wives tale, which is actually circulated by old husbands, that a woman isn't fulfilled without a husband and kids. If he's worried about lonely women in need of love, than he should encourage lesbianism as well as polygamy.
Because gay people in those days could not reproduce...and it was about boosting your population in those days...I ain't talking about last week here...I'm talking hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years ago...when their cultures where at the formative stages!

For these cultures, poligamy was not about getting their rocks off or some perveted thing...it was simply survival...and they survived that way...



The People's Republic of Clogher
The main reason I'm no longer married is because one of us thought that one partner wasn't sufficient. That is all.
__________________
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how the Tatty 100 is done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves." - Brendan Behan



If that makes sense, then why haven't women ever been allowed to take multiple husbands in locations and times where men have outnumbered women, as was often the case in the West on the US Frontier, in Texas both when it was part of Mexico and during its days as a Republic, in Australia during its early settlement? Only in a movie, Paint Your Wagon.
Probably because these people came from strict Christian godfearing backgrounds which is a male dominated religion. Surely the thought of women having more than one husband, although perfectly logical in the circumstances, would be hair raisingly shocking to the male ego



Well, mine is a little more boring, because they all knew about each other, and they knew it was ONLY going out to have fun. No sex . . . period. There were eight of them at one time, but two split pretty fast, once they realized the sex rule. I juggled six for over three months. I was simply tired of crappy relationships, and decided to try this, and see how it went. It was fun. It was also frustrating at times, but mostly fun.
I am not one to sleep with more than one person, so I can't imagine this polygamy being a good thing. I also can't believe a man would "truly" love me, be in love with me, if he can share that with another.
If I wouldn't want my children doing it, then I don't agree with it. That is how I decide on things. This is one big "Hell no!"
Christine, would you mind your child doing this?
I wouldn't want either of my sons involved with someone who was juggling various partners just for fun no, unless both sides were in agreement.

In the mid 1970s a girl from a working class background (me) shocked her parents by moving in with a bloke who she'd only known for a couple of weeks. Even when I'd lived with him for years we still had to sleep in separate bedrooms when we went to stay with them. Now, that bloke is my husband and we've been married for 26 years and both my parents loved him like a son. Times move on and society develops different outlooks. What I'm trying to say is that if my son was involved in a serious relationship with two girls, provided they were all in agreement and provided they all treated each other with respect, then really is it for me to judge? I don't think so. Besides I might have the chance of twice as many grandchildren



"When the Spanish parliament took its historic vote legalizing both gay marriage and adoption of children by gay couples, Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (left) -- who put the full prestige of his office and party behind passage of the gay human rights legislation -- made probably the most remarkable speech in favor of full equality for those with same-sex hearts ever delivered by a head of government anywhere, in which he quoted two of the most illustrious gay poets in history. Here are excerpts from Zapatero's speech":

We are not legislating, honorable members, for people far away and not known by us. We are enlarging the opportunity for happiness to our neighbors, our co-workers, our friends and, our families: at the same time we are making a more decent society, because a decent society is one that does not humiliate its members.

In the poem 'The Family,' our poet Luis Cernuda was sorry because, 'How does man live in denial in vain by giving rules that prohibit and condemn?'

Today, the Spanish society answers to a group of people who, during many years have, been humiliated, whose rights have been ignored, whose dignity has been offended, their identity denied, and their liberty oppressed. Today the Spanish society grants them the respect they deserve, recognizes their rights, restores their dignity, affirms their identity, and restores their liberty.

It is true that they are only a minority, but their triumph is everyone's triumph. It is also the triumph of those who oppose this law, even though they do not know this yet: because it is the triumph of Liberty. Their victory makes all of us (even those who oppose the law) better people, it makes our society better. Honorable members, There is no damage to marriage or to the concept of family in allowing two people of the same sex to get married. To the contrary, what happens is this class of Spanish citizens get the potential to organize their lives with the rights and privileges of marriage and family. There is no danger to the institution of marriage, but precisely the opposite: this law enhances and respects marriage.

Today, conscious that some people and institutions are in a profound disagreement with this change in our civil law, I wish to express that, like other reforms to the marriage code that preceded this one, this law will generate no evil, that its only consequence will be the avoiding of senseless suffering of decent human beings. A society that avoids senseless suffering of decent human beings is a better society.

"With the approval of this Bill, our country takes another step in the path of liberty and tolerance that was begun by the democratic change of government. Our children will look at us incredulously if we tell them that many years ago, our mothers had less rights than our fathers, or if we tell them that people had to stay married against their will even though they were unable to share their lives. Today we can offer them a beautiful lesson: every right gained, each access to liberty has been the result of the struggle and sacrifice of many people that deserve our recognition and praise.

Today we demonstrate with this Bill that societies can better themselves and can cross barriers and create tolerance by putting a stop to the unhappiness and humiliation of some of our citizens. Today, for many of our countrymen, comes the day predicted by Kavafis one century ago:

'Later 'twas said of the most perfect society
someone else, made like me
certainly will come out and act freely.'



A system of cells interlinked
Thread title altered per request of the thread creator.

As you were.
__________________
“It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.” ― Thomas Sowell



Just off the subject a little, and in response to Adi's last post. I'm constantly amazed by Spain. This country, so soon (in relative terms) out from under Franco's rule has broken free of the dictator and the repression of the Catholic church and has come out running into the light. Spain, you're a star!

What do you see in Mr Zapatero's government?



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/eu...in-809619.html



I always thought women were better suited for politics than men.
__________________
“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton



OK, now that Fufneck has come out it is my turn

Umm Errr I was in a relationship with 2 men for 11yrs, they both knew about each other and liked each other We whet to a Wedding together once, I sat between the 2 of them, I was such a scandle Men couldn't understand it and woman envied me
I am not with either man now but good friends with both, we talk on the phone a lot and have coffee often.
I see you've been busy What did your parents (if theyrestill here, if not sorry!) thought of you having two men? Curious!
__________________
I Amsterdam

And do check my "art": Deviant



OK, now that Fufneck has come out it is my turn

Umm Errr I was in a relationship with 2 men for 11yrs, they both knew about each other and liked each other We whet to a Wedding together once, I sat between the 2 of them, I was such a scandle Men couldn't understand it and woman envied me
I am not with either man now but good friends with both, we talk on the phone a lot and have coffee often.
I totally identify with that! I met my second wife when she was on a date with my brother. A buddy and I carried on a friendly rivalry with this one lady I knew. We all hung with a bunch who used to make the country western honky tonks in the Houston, back when Gilley's was running red hot and wild, and we were always competing for dances with her. First time I asked her out for a just-the-two-of-us date, she turned me down because she was going to Vegas that weekend with her ex-husband. I teased her about she'd better spend her time at the downstairs games. But when her late night return flight landed in Houston, I was the only person in the debarking area and I was carrying flowers for her. She and I were a real item for a couple of years and are still friends.

I have never asked a woman what she was doing when she's not with me because frankly I don't care--it's only what happens when we're together that matters to me. Besides, it doesn't do any good to fuss and worry about whether she's being true or not. If she is, she'll resent the nagging. If she isn't, then there's nothing in the world you can do to stop it. So I'm a big believer in "don't ask, don't tell."



Because in the example the guy gave me it was after centuries of war...not a gold rush or something else that was carried out by choice by a culture that already had most of it's ground rules in place...and be honest, the need to boost your population would not be best served by the 1 woman + multiple men method would it?



Because gay people in those days could not reproduce...and it was about boosting your population in those days...I ain't talking about last week here...I'm talking hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years ago...when their cultures where at the formative stages!

For these cultures, poligamy was not about getting their rocks off or some perveted thing...it was simply survival...and they survived that way...
Is your friend's culture still in the formative stage now? If not, then why is his group still practicing polygamy? If it were because of the effect of wars "hundreds and hundreds of years ago" then the population should be rebuilt by now where there would be no need for poligamy.

I don't buy polygamy as the only solution to a small population. For example, a lot of young men got killed off in the US Civil War, leaving behind an army of widows in the South. But it wasn't long before a lot of Southern belles started marrying Yankee soldiers stationed down here during Reconstruction. Look at the millions of French, Germans, English, and other Europeans who died during World Wars I and II--yet the populations of those countries have rebuilt in less than a year. Certainly the US armed forces did their best to help them out. And we were still contributing when I was stationed over there in the 1960s. Even in our own country where some claim we did our best to wipe out the Indians, their populations have grown since then and continue to grow today, all without resorting to polygamy. Polygamy's just an excuse, a Dr. Strangelove fantasy, not a solution.



Probably because these people came from strict Christian godfearing backgrounds which is a male dominated religion. Surely the thought of women having more than one husband, although perfectly logical in the circumstances, would be hair raisingly shocking to the male ego
I agree, Christine. You notice that polygamy only crops up in groups where men control the church, the state, and the votes? Still, most men would blush to suggest such a thing. But there are some men who live only in childish fantasy.