Accelerating The 'Roe Effect' - Comments Page 2

Article comments

Subscribe to comment RSS

• 26 - DrPat

  Mar 23, 2005 at 8:17 pm

  Significantly left out of every such discussion is polyandry, under which one woman is allowed multiple husbands. Perhaps this is because our current system of divorce and remarriage (with community property) gives us serial polyandry and polygamy instead. How much better for the children if all their daddies remain at home!?!
  
  [cricket sounds]
  
  What man here cannot honestly admit that when he hears "polyamory," he envisions his own wife still there to provide comfort and home-cookin' while a lush young nubile wench (or three) tend to his other needs?

• 27 - David Flanagan

  Mar 23, 2005 at 8:20 pm

  Three quick comments:
  1) I'm a big scifi fan and, of course, Heinlein is one of the best. Starship Troopers is one of my fav of his books.
  2) The line marriage concept is scifi. You could try it here, if the laws allowed, but, even in the book, it worked because of certain extraneous factors which forced it on the colonists.
  3) Monogamous marriage is by far both historically and culturally the dominant form of marriage. People come to live in the US and Canada all the time and what do they tend to bring with them? Their extended families of course. They support each other, share the burdens of parenting, cooking, cleaning, working, etc., and they bring their excellent work ethic with them. But look at Asia and what do you see? Monogamous marriage. How about Europe? The same. South American, North America, everywhere you go, the most dominant form of "coupling" is monogamous marriage.
  
  Whether you believe in Darwinian Evolution or a Christian God, it still makes sense to have an ideal form of bonding. That ideal form is monogamous heterosexual marriage, and the citizens of this country, as well as the government, has every right to define marriage in a way that insures the healthiest possible society.
  
  Thanks,
  
  David

• 28 - David Flanagan

  Mar 23, 2005 at 8:24 pm

  I should also say what I have not said before, I do believe that it's not the government's job to police our bedrooms. People are free and should remain free to make choices, but expecting that the government has to give an official blessing to each and every form or relationship is going a bit far.
  
  Thanks,
  
  David

• 29 - gonzo marx

  Mar 23, 2005 at 8:33 pm

  to DrPat...
  i fully understand your Point..which is why i clearly stated that whatever works for the individuals in EACH CASE...if some enjoy the amazonian model..thas their bizness...not mine..and i don't feel it takes away from my marriage at all
  
  i think some dom/sub types would find it relatively easy to come up with a snigle female and a horde of drooling men in leather as the perfect "family"
  
  to David Flanagan...
  i disagree with your definition of "ideal"..in Asia polygamy has been rampant thru most of their history...chinese culture even has specific words for the number one wife...each of the two others, and specific rank names for various levels of legal concubines...a bit misanthropic, i know..but part of one of the oldest and largest cultures in recorded history...
  
  polyamorous marriage has been traditional in many south seas cultures
  
  i have no idea what is "ideal"..i refute your Postulate that the "state" or "society" has ANY claim on telling me what is "ideal" in ANY way , shape , or form as long as i do not cause demonstrable harm to my neighbors, or violate the Law...
  
  i also reserve my Right to advocate my position, and any attempt i may make to legally challenge and/or change the Law
  
  i also Respect and will defend YOUR right to your Position, even when i disagree with you...MOST ESPECIALLY when i disagree
  
  this ;ast fact alone seem to seperate me from many on the so-called "Right" who pay lip service to the Principles i have just stated
  
  and i am just Jester enough to point it out..and have a perverse sense of glee in shouting out when the Emperor is nekkid
  
  Excelsior!
  

• 30 - alienboy

  Mar 24, 2005 at 6:00 am

  I can only assume that David Flanagan is trying to wind up other blogcritics with this outrageously offensive and frankly deranged post. I am happy to take the bait!
  
  Can anybody PLEASE explain to me what business it is of the state or ANY of the many busybodies who seem to live only to tell other people how to live their lives to tell other people how to live their lives?
  
  I really don't mind if people choose to devote themselves to whatever path of "self-enlightenment" they want, but I have a seriously BIG problem when these people try to bring their "beliefs" into my lifestyle.
  
  Why can't these interfering types just focus on their own little corner of the world and leave everybody else to get on with their own thing? Isn't tolerance a part of the dogmas of most of these belief systems anyway?
  
  BAH!
  
  

• 31 - Pro-Polygamy

  Mar 24, 2005 at 6:22 am

  It turns out that pro-polygamists are more conserative, more Bible-dedicated, and more pro-women than conservative Christians are supposed to be.
  www.Pro-Polygamy.com/articles.php
  www.ChristianPolygamy.INFO
  www.LoveNotForce.com
  
  The Bible clearly proves polygamy is 100% biblical.
  www.BiblicalPolygamy.com
  
  Pro-Polygamy.com has been mentioned in the Wall Street Journal and that site has been saying that "Polygamy is the next civil rights battle" for some time.
  www.Pro-Polygamy.com
  
  Any author's reference to "civil rights" regarding polygamy has simply seen the media articles presented at that Pro-Polygamy.com site over the years.
  
  The problem in general is the irresponsible hysteria by intellectually immature people who are not able to cope with the issue maturely and Christians who are too afraid to stop believing a Catholic-only created doctrine that does not ever exist in the Bible when you read it for yourself.
  
  After all, the Adam and Eve story and "one flesh" passages were both written by polygamous Moses!
  www.BiblicalPolygamy.com/exegesis/remember-moses-wrote-it/
  
  How more obvious could it get?
  
  So, while some would like to hide the truth, there are some non-Mormon conservative Christians who do see the truth. This is not a liberal idea at all. There's even an organization for Christian Polygamy:
  www.TruthBearer.org
  
  People should really think before they act hysterical.

• 32 - Dave Nalle

  Mar 24, 2005 at 9:13 am

  Frankly, I don't give a rats ass what the bible says about polygamy, I just can't see any legal justification for prohibiting it. What consenting adults choose to do in their relationships is none of the government's business and never should have been - well, except that it's just fun to annoy mormons, of course.
  
  Dave

• 33 - alienboy

  Mar 24, 2005 at 9:22 am

  Nalle and Alienboy agree!
  
  Again!!

• 34 - Dave Nalle

  Mar 24, 2005 at 9:37 am

  Must be a sign of the coming apocalypse.
  
  Dave

• 35 - alienboy

  Mar 24, 2005 at 9:40 am

  LOL