Started By
Message

re: Polygamy.....what's your opinion?

Posted on 2/18/15 at 4:46 pm to
Posted by Tornado Alley
Member since Mar 2012
26519 posts
Posted on 2/18/15 at 4:46 pm to
quote:

So you don't need a cow's consent to chop it up and serve on a toasted bun, but you need its consent to share a life of love?


A)
B) A life of love in a typical "man to livestock" relationship is fine, but not in a romantic sense.
Posted by Aux Arc
SW Missouri
Member since Oct 2011
2184 posts
Posted on 2/18/15 at 4:46 pm to
I always thought it would be horrible with the double dose of nagging. But what if they bitch to each other and leave you alone. Is it possible this is how it works? If so, Bravo, Mormons.
Posted by Tornado Alley
Member since Mar 2012
26519 posts
Posted on 2/18/15 at 4:47 pm to
Does anyone know what on earth that dude in "Sister Wives" does to be able to prop up four wives and a bagillion children?
Posted by Flame Salamander
Texas Gulf - Clear Lake
Member since Jan 2012
3044 posts
Posted on 2/18/15 at 5:14 pm to
I make my wife wear that Polygamy Porter shirt out in public...she resents it until she's had a few.

(you should have shown the colorful back too)
Posted by UpToPar
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
22154 posts
Posted on 2/18/15 at 5:48 pm to
quote:

Wrong. It's called precedent. By allowing men to marry men and women to marry women, a precedent has been set that the definition of marriage is very much open to interpretation. If marriage cannot be limited to one man and one woman, then on what basis can it be limited? How can you tell three women they cannot be married when you've already allowed two of them to get married? And if you allow three women to marry would it not be discrimination to deny the same right to two women and one man?


I don't think you understand what the "precedent" said.

This is an equal protection issue. Without valid justification, you cannot deny equal protection under the laws. There's a valid justification for not allowing people related by less than 4 degrees marry. There isn't any valid justification (in the court's eyes) for not allowing two men or two women to marry.
Posted by TheBoo
South to Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
4504 posts
Posted on 2/19/15 at 9:23 am to
I don't care if it's illegal or not. That's my opinion chief.
Posted by Wtodd
Tampa, FL
Member since Oct 2013
67488 posts
Posted on 2/19/15 at 9:36 am to
quote:

Does anyone know what on earth that dude in "Sister Wives" does to be able to prop up four wives and a bagillion children?

I think you answered your own question but the show itself is the answer
Posted by USMCTiger03
Member since Sep 2007
71176 posts
Posted on 2/19/15 at 10:07 am to
I think it's a great option if the personalities match up: extra set of hands for helping around the house and with the kids, extra personality for hang outs, and not too mention having and extra vaj around.

I could see it being cool. But emphasis on the personality requirement.
Posted by Speedy G
Member since Aug 2013
3900 posts
Posted on 2/19/15 at 10:31 am to
quote:

[O]nce you expand the definition of marriage to being more than just one man and one woman to where it can be two men or two women, then on what basis can you deny that same right to three men or three women (or more)..?

Math.

I don't personally have a problem with it, but your analogy is strained.
Posted by Boudreaux35
BR
Member since Sep 2007
21474 posts
Posted on 2/19/15 at 10:46 am to
Why would anyone WANT more than one wife?
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram