polygamist homes opperate the same way. the exception being that the kids learn more. partly due to having 2 teachers and two mums can offer twice the love as one.
i'd like to hear you explain how having 2 mums is any nuttier than 2 men. in fact; how is it different from a lesbian couple raising children? you support that. the only difference i see is that there's a third teacher bringing a male influence into the mix.
I didn't say that having two moms is nuttier than two men. What I dispute is that a polygamous family is somehow "better" than a traditional one, which is what you are claiming. If it's all about having an extra pair of hands, why not just hire a housekeeper? If you can afford to support an additional stay-at-home wife and her children, you can certainly afford a maid.
As I've said time and time again, I don't care what people do in their personal lives. If all the adults enter into the partnership willingly, everyone is happy with the arrangement, and all of the children are properly cared for, I don't think it's anyone else's business. Monogamy or polygamy, straight or gay, doesn't matter to me one bit. But the way you put it, it's as though traditional families are putting their kids at some sort of disadvantage because their parents have to spend time on things other than teaching and entertaining the kids. That's nonsense ... kids NEED unstructured time, most middle and upper class kids don't get enough of it.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
I didn't say that having two moms is nuttier than two men. What I dispute is that a polygamous family is somehow "better" than a traditional one, which is what you are claiming. If it's all about having an extra pair of hands, why not just hire a housekeeper? If you can afford to support an additional stay-at-home wife and her children, you can certainly afford a maid.
As I've said time and time again, I don't care what people do in their personal lives. If all the adults enter into the partnership willingly, everyone is happy with the arrangement, and all of the children are properly cared for, I don't think it's anyone else's business. Monogamy or polygamy, straight or gay, doesn't matter to me one bit. But the way you put it, it's as though traditional families are putting their kids at some sort of disadvantage because their parents have to spend time on things other than teaching and entertaining the kids. That's nonsense ... kids NEED unstructured time, most middle and upper class kids don't get enough of it.
i didn't say this. i only repeated the results of studies. it's psychcologists that said this.
from the things i've seen; it's not 2 stay at home mums. one or both mums may work (at different times); but the bottom line is there's a mum available at all times. when a child wants its mum; a maid is no substitute.
i'm not trying to sell polygamy. someone asked for a non-religious reason against gay marriage. the reason is that polygamists deserve equal rights and freedom from discrimination the same as everyone else. people can't accept polygamy so it's a dead issue. you challenged me and i presented sufficient proof to back what i said.
i'm not saying people should be polygamists. i'm only answering a question and backing it with fact.
i didn't say this. i only repeated the results of studies. it's psychcologists that said this.
from the things i've seen; it's not 2 stay at home mums. one or both mums may work (at different times); but the bottom line is there's a mum available at all times. when a child wants its mum; a maid is no substitute.
i'm not trying to sell polygamy. someone asked for a non-religious reason against gay marriage. the reason is that polygamists deserve equal rights and freedom from discrimination the same as everyone else. people can't accept polygamy so it's a dead issue. you challenged me and i presented sufficient proof to back what i said.
i'm not saying people should be polygamists. i'm only answering a question and backing it with fact.
This is the first I've heard that you're reporting study results. You didn't mention studies, and didn't post any links to the results. And when you say "individual polygamy has produced better homes than any monogimus homes," you certainly ARE backing polygamy! Why, we're practically child abusers for not having at least two moms around so that the little darlings never have a moment to themselves.
If you're so into studies, why don't you dig up some studies on jealousy within families? Very few people are going to be content to be one of several husbands or wives. You're fooling yourself if you don't think there's going to be competition among them and that they'll treat the children of the others the same way they treat their own, or that they're all going to happily work together for the benefit of the household. It may work out in a few isolated instances, but for most people it would create more problems than it solves.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
This is the first I've heard that you're reporting study results. You didn't mention studies, and didn't post any links to the results. And when you say "individual polygamy has produced better homes than any monogimus homes," you certainly ARE backing polygamy! Why, we're practically child abusers for not having at least two moms around so that the little darlings never have a moment to themselves.
If you're so into studies, why don't you dig up some studies on jealousy within families? Very few people are going to be content to be one of several husbands or wives. You're fooling yourself if you don't think there's going to be competition among them and that they'll treat the children of the others the same way they treat their own, or that they're all going to happily work together for the benefit of the household. It may work out in a few isolated instances, but for most people it would create more problems than it solves.
i posted links pages back and even PMed a link to you. you seem to confuse normal polygamy and harems. you're fooling yourself if you think sibling rivalry and jealousy don't exist in monogimus homes. there's competition in every situation; be it a home; workplace; schools; and even in churches.
now; the crack about not treating others' children as you treat your own. you're joking right? where does this leave gay couples? the child is clearly not their own so you're saying they won't love that child like their own? that's what you wrote. what about adoption? should we stop adoptions? and what about step children? should we ban single or divorced people from remarrying until their kids are grown?
your argument doesn't hold water.
i posted links pages back and even PMed a link to you. you seem to confuse normal polygamy and harems. you're fooling yourself if you think sibling rivalry and jealousy don't exist in monogimus homes. there's competition in every situation; be it a home; workplace; schools; and even in churches.
now; the crack about not treating others' children as you treat your own. you're joking right? where does this leave gay couples? the child is clearly not their own so you're saying they won't love that child like their own? that's what you wrote. what about adoption? should we stop adoptions? and what about step children? should we ban single or divorced people from remarrying until their kids are grown?
your argument doesn't hold water.
clearly you've never known anyone who has divorced. do the biological mother and step-mother always cooperate perfectly with respect to the child? it's not about sibling rivalry... it's about having 2 women or 2 men competing for the attention and affection of the 3rd party (male or female). dyou get jealous if your wife or gf is banging some other dude? you think that's not going to be a problem in polygamous households?
that said, i cautiously endorse legal polygamy, assuming everyone involved is an adult. the trouble comes in with respect to legal issues. when dad's in a coma, which wife gets to decide whether or not to pull the plug? and whose word counts more if they disagree? that is my only issue with polygamy. legally speaking, people should be able to create ONE civil partner... i dont care if it's your wife, parent, sibling, roommate, best friend. the sole role of that person is to make those kinds of decisions and to establish financial, child-rearing partnerships. for reasons of simplicity, it makes sense to say you get ONE such partner, not two. beyond that, your church can allow you to "marry" whoever you damn well please, but you can only designate one person as your legal partner for tax and medical purposes.
i posted links pages back and even PMed a link to you. you seem to confuse normal polygamy and harems. you're fooling yourself if you think sibling rivalry and jealousy don't exist in monogimus homes. there's competition in every situation; be it a home; workplace; schools; and even in churches.
now; the crack about not treating others' children as you treat your own. you're joking right? where does this leave gay couples? the child is clearly not their own so you're saying they won't love that child like their own? that's what you wrote. what about adoption? should we stop adoptions? and what about step children? should we ban single or divorced people from remarrying until their kids are grown?
your argument doesn't hold water.
What you PM'd me was an not a scientific study, it was an opinion piece from the Washington Post.
If you can't see the difference between people adopting a child and raising it as their own, and multiple parents in one household being jointly responsible for both their own children and the children of others, I really don't know what to say to you. If you don't think those moms are going to be engaging in a bit of back-stabbing and one-upsmanship and trying to gain advantages for their own children over the children of the other mothers, you're don't know much about human nature.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
clearly you've never known anyone who has divorced. do the biological mother and step-mother always cooperate perfectly with respect to the child? it's not about sibling rivalry... it's about having 2 women or 2 men competing for the attention and affection of the 3rd party (male or female). dyou get jealous if your wife or gf is banging some other dude? you think that's not going to be a problem in polygamous households?
SOMETIMES THEY DO; SOMETIMES THEY DON'T. if it were going to be a problem; they wouldn't get into that polygamist situation.
that said, i cautiously endorse legal polygamy, assuming everyone involved is an adult. the trouble comes in with respect to legal issues. when dad's in a coma, which wife gets to decide whether or not to pull the plug? and whose word counts more if they disagree? that is my only issue with polygamy. legally speaking, people should be able to create ONE civil partner... i dont care if it's your wife, parent, sibling, roommate, best friend. the sole role of that person is to make those kinds of decisions and to establish financial, child-rearing partnerships. for reasons of simplicity, it makes sense to say you get ONE such partner, not two. beyond that, your church can allow you to "marry" whoever you damn well please, but you can only designate one person as your legal partner for tax and medical purposes.
and that's why the laws must be changed. the point of the movement is that if we're changing laws and the way we think for gays; it's unconstitutional to leave out the polygamist minority. that's what we're all about right? the minorities. every argument used by gays is also being used by polygamists. from civil rights violations to being denied the persuit of happiness.
maybe you know more that psychologists and researchers. i guess you couldn't follow that the maid example was only an analogy to show how a monogimus home could get the same results. if you bothered to do the slightest investigating; you would have found that both mother participate equally. if i can use another analogy; it's like a tag team.
Your words were that polygamy provides better results than "ANY" monogamous marriage. So, all of your misguided analogies aside, you want to now backtrack over that comment?
Again, you don't have any statistical proof that polygamy produces better child rearing results than monogamous marriages. Can you even describe what proper child rearing is? Do you know what determinants are used to measure the well-being of children?
"Jeffs teaches that a man has to have at least three wives in order to get into heaven and the more wives man has, the closer he is to heaven. Former church members claim that Jeffs himself has seventy wives"
Ok...70 wives is a bit insane...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
its not anything against anyone personally.. your faith is your faith.. its anger toward massive unnecessary bloodshed due to 2000 year old religions that were thought up by barbaric less evolved people
well put. i haven't read any other post yet but the thread probably could've stopped after this one.
Your words were that polygamy provides better results than "ANY" monogamous marriage. So, all of your misguided analogies aside, you want to now backtrack over that comment?
Again, you don't have any statistical proof that polygamy produces better child rearing results than monogamous marriages. Can you even describe what proper child rearing is? Do you know what determinants are used to measure the well-being of children?
i don't recall using the word "ANY". if i did it was in error.
i believe ahnimus posted the book where this info can be found.
"Jeffs teaches that a man has to have at least three wives in order to get into heaven and the more wives man has, the closer he is to heaven. Former church members claim that Jeffs himself has seventy wives"
Ok...70 wives is a bit insane...
jeffs is insane; and a pedophile. he leads a cult similar to others like jim jones. using jeffs cult to compare polygamy is like pointing out a black man convicted of murder to say that all blacks are murderers.
jeffs is insane; and a pedophile. he leads a cult similar to others like jim jones. using jeffs cult to compare polygamy is like pointing out a black man convicted of murder to say that all blacks are murderers.
you mean, um, all murderers aren't serial killers?
Comments
if just the thought discusts me and makes me want to puke; isn't it obvious that the answer is no?
As I've said time and time again, I don't care what people do in their personal lives. If all the adults enter into the partnership willingly, everyone is happy with the arrangement, and all of the children are properly cared for, I don't think it's anyone else's business. Monogamy or polygamy, straight or gay, doesn't matter to me one bit. But the way you put it, it's as though traditional families are putting their kids at some sort of disadvantage because their parents have to spend time on things other than teaching and entertaining the kids. That's nonsense ... kids NEED unstructured time, most middle and upper class kids don't get enough of it.
i didn't say this. i only repeated the results of studies. it's psychcologists that said this.
from the things i've seen; it's not 2 stay at home mums. one or both mums may work (at different times); but the bottom line is there's a mum available at all times. when a child wants its mum; a maid is no substitute.
i'm not trying to sell polygamy. someone asked for a non-religious reason against gay marriage. the reason is that polygamists deserve equal rights and freedom from discrimination the same as everyone else. people can't accept polygamy so it's a dead issue. you challenged me and i presented sufficient proof to back what i said.
i'm not saying people should be polygamists. i'm only answering a question and backing it with fact.
If you're so into studies, why don't you dig up some studies on jealousy within families? Very few people are going to be content to be one of several husbands or wives. You're fooling yourself if you don't think there's going to be competition among them and that they'll treat the children of the others the same way they treat their own, or that they're all going to happily work together for the benefit of the household. It may work out in a few isolated instances, but for most people it would create more problems than it solves.
i posted links pages back and even PMed a link to you. you seem to confuse normal polygamy and harems. you're fooling yourself if you think sibling rivalry and jealousy don't exist in monogimus homes. there's competition in every situation; be it a home; workplace; schools; and even in churches.
now; the crack about not treating others' children as you treat your own. you're joking right? where does this leave gay couples? the child is clearly not their own so you're saying they won't love that child like their own? that's what you wrote. what about adoption? should we stop adoptions? and what about step children? should we ban single or divorced people from remarrying until their kids are grown?
your argument doesn't hold water.
clearly you've never known anyone who has divorced. do the biological mother and step-mother always cooperate perfectly with respect to the child? it's not about sibling rivalry... it's about having 2 women or 2 men competing for the attention and affection of the 3rd party (male or female). dyou get jealous if your wife or gf is banging some other dude? you think that's not going to be a problem in polygamous households?
that said, i cautiously endorse legal polygamy, assuming everyone involved is an adult. the trouble comes in with respect to legal issues. when dad's in a coma, which wife gets to decide whether or not to pull the plug? and whose word counts more if they disagree? that is my only issue with polygamy. legally speaking, people should be able to create ONE civil partner... i dont care if it's your wife, parent, sibling, roommate, best friend. the sole role of that person is to make those kinds of decisions and to establish financial, child-rearing partnerships. for reasons of simplicity, it makes sense to say you get ONE such partner, not two. beyond that, your church can allow you to "marry" whoever you damn well please, but you can only designate one person as your legal partner for tax and medical purposes.
If you can't see the difference between people adopting a child and raising it as their own, and multiple parents in one household being jointly responsible for both their own children and the children of others, I really don't know what to say to you. If you don't think those moms are going to be engaging in a bit of back-stabbing and one-upsmanship and trying to gain advantages for their own children over the children of the other mothers, you're don't know much about human nature.
SOMETIMES THEY DO; SOMETIMES THEY DON'T. if it were going to be a problem; they wouldn't get into that polygamist situation.
and that's why the laws must be changed. the point of the movement is that if we're changing laws and the way we think for gays; it's unconstitutional to leave out the polygamist minority. that's what we're all about right? the minorities. every argument used by gays is also being used by polygamists. from civil rights violations to being denied the persuit of happiness.
Your words were that polygamy provides better results than "ANY" monogamous marriage. So, all of your misguided analogies aside, you want to now backtrack over that comment?
Again, you don't have any statistical proof that polygamy produces better child rearing results than monogamous marriages. Can you even describe what proper child rearing is? Do you know what determinants are used to measure the well-being of children?
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
"Jeffs teaches that a man has to have at least three wives in order to get into heaven and the more wives man has, the closer he is to heaven. Former church members claim that Jeffs himself has seventy wives"
Ok...70 wives is a bit insane...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
well put. i haven't read any other post yet but the thread probably could've stopped after this one.
i don't recall using the word "ANY". if i did it was in error.
i believe ahnimus posted the book where this info can be found.
jeffs is insane; and a pedophile. he leads a cult similar to others like jim jones. using jeffs cult to compare polygamy is like pointing out a black man convicted of murder to say that all blacks are murderers.
you mean, um, all murderers aren't serial killers?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.