Happier Abroad Forum Community

Your dream of having 20 screaming kids from 5 wives in 1 house can finally come true.

Polygamy To Be Legalized?
http://news.msn.com/us/final-ruling-iss ... lygamy-ban

.

Polygamy doesn't sound too bad, if a man can take care of more than one wife and children, then why can't he?

I'd take three if I could and were able to afford them. All of relatively equal beauty and traits.

Hello,

YOU MEN, LIKE ENTIRE COUNTRIES, ARE ALL ON THE WRONG TRACK. THIS IS SIN. A MAN SHOULD ONLY HAVE ONE MARRIAGE.

sea_dragon wrote:P******y doesn't sound too bad, if a man can take care of more than one wife and children, then why can't he?

Hello,

It is wrong because it is sin. It is sin because {(Gentlemen, pardon me for saying these uncouth statements!!!!)} it means engaging in amorous and physical r*lations with more than one person.

I.S.I.S. is also flawed in this case. P*****y is allowed in Islam and it is wrong. It is consensual, just as p**-martial re*ations are. But just because things are consensual doesn't automatically make them correct. The SIN doesn't get affected if all the parties agree to partaking in it. It remains sin.

{(Spits on feminism [women's education, women's sports, women's political power] in front of every man here who support it)} AND THAT'S FOR BEING ITS FRIEND!!!!

(1) Woman was created to serve man.

(2) Polygamy is in accord with natural law, since most men have polygamous impulses, and even the sluttiest women dream of belonging to one man (even prostitutes worship their pimp).

(3) Polygamy was lawful and still common in Jesus's time, according to Jewish historians, yet he never condemned it.

(4) Jesus endorsed polygamy in a ribald, hilarious parable recorded in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 25.

(5) Adding new rules to God's Law is a sin.

If there is a great attrition of men due to wars and such or the potential to capture foreign females, polygamy makes sense to soak up the surplus female population. If not, it means that men are being deprived of a stake in their society, thus weakening it. Feminism is essentially a form of polygamy where the elite lay claim to all females (and other resources) over time, while other men are gradually reduced to underclass slave status. Look how much that sucks.

Jester wrote:
<>

<>

Hello,

P******y is a sin. You just want to do the wrong thing.

Anatol wrote:
P******y is a sin.

So you just wrote that onto the last page of your Bible, did you?

Cornfed wrote:If there is a great attrition of men due to wars and such or the potential to capture foreign females, polygamy makes sense to soak up the surplus female population. If not, it means that men are being deprived of a stake in their society, thus weakening it. Feminism is essentially a form of polygamy where the elite lay claim to all females (and other resources) over time, while other men are gradually reduced to underclass slave status. Look how much that sucks.

This is sort of like being against captalism, supporting decent living for everyone. Then, when the Reds take over, the exuberant Jew Commissars are riding around in limousines, living in palaces, etc.

Lenin gave a speech to his comrades in the Kremlin stating almost exactly this.

In other words your concern for the common man is a red herring.

Marriage restrains the wastrel. Anarcchy and Marxism empower the wastrel. Biblical marriage requires a man to support a chaste, loyal wife for life.

Powerful wealthy men in Jewish New York or Lenin's Russia or the modern music scene can screw as many women as they are able to, based on status. Hell Goebbels did a bit of this in Germany too. Without the restraint of Biblical marriage, a member of a privileged elite can despoil hundreds of women a year. Under Biblical marriage, this is simply not possible. Well, unless you are the richest man in the world, like King Solomon (Book of Kings) or King Xerxes (Book of Esther). But restraints of money and time prevent most polygamists from having more than two or three wives, over a longtime. That is far FEWER women than those same men would screw in high school and college here in the "modern world". Thus freeing up oodles for the guy that has more modest aspirations.

Too much ancient history? OK. Look at modern Africa, in the backward cattle-raising countries. Any hardworking guy there can get a job in the city, save up money to buy cattle, and with cattle, a wife. He dreams of a second or third wife. While he is working happily to save up, no low-life is porking his future bride. He has something to look forward to. And thats why there is no shortage of marriageable women in Black Africa, despite unfettered no-cap polygamy.

Polygamy was never the problem. Promiscuity is.

Jester wrote:(1) Woman was created to serve man.

(2) Polygamy is in accord with natural law, since most men have polygamous impulses, and even the sluttiest women dream of belonging to one man (even hoes worship their pimp).

(3) Polygamy was lawful and still common in Jesus's time, according to Jewish historians, yet he never condemned it.

(4) Jesus endorsed polygamy in a ribald, hilarious parable recorded in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 25.

(5) Adding new rules to God's Law is a sin.

If we were still following, indeed if we ever followed the Bible, every men would be well enjoying the services of 2 or 3 young brides. Yet what would matter the most, the world would be a more just, peaceful and happier place. Dreamers are allowed here, but real life is another.

.