Muslims Practicing Polygamy in the US

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
No, he actually is right. Editing posts after the fact in a thread such as this, deserves a little acknowledgment. It would seem that you are the one who is editing his posts secretly - making you the liar and the coward.

He did not insult you - it merely is a fact.

[/quote]

Prove it.

edit- editing a post to say what? My opinion is my opinion. If I wish to elaborate on it, that’s my perogative.

Prove it, or shut the hell up.

Show me the quote where it was changed without an edit mark. That last part was edited btw as was this:

You can not refute my statements, so you attack my credibility?

Shameful.

I want to see a quote that was changed.

182

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
mafzal4 wrote:
No, he actually is right. Editing posts after the fact in a thread such as this, deserves a little acknowledgment. It would seem that you are the one who is editing his posts secretly - making you the liar and the coward.

He did not insult you - it merely is a fact.

Prove it.

edit- editing a post to say what? My opinion is my opinion. If I wish to elaborate on it, that’s my perogative.

Prove it, or shut the hell up.

Show me the quote where it was changed without an edit mark. That last part was edited btw as was this:

You can not refute my statements, so you attack my credibility?

Shameful.

I want to see a quote that was changed.[/quote]

I don’t have pictures or snapshots of your messages before they were changed, to compare to what they are now.

Only you know what you changed - that is why its shameful that you edited them without letting anyone else know.

Asking me to prove something when you clearly know that the way you hides from anyone being able to prove the truth is a sign of immaturity and childness.

Oh, and yeah, I refuted all your statements that I personally replied to. How about you do the same to my posts?

183

Hey, I didn’t bring up this Kindergarden B.S. This is the political Thread, not the gossip thread.

You want to talk issues, I’m all for it.

The truth is, you can not prove it because Lixy’s accusations are not true. Next time I edit something with out “-edit” please bring it to my attention.

I will not be holding my breath.

-edit, or replying to this bunch of crap any further.

-edit, my final thoughts on this: if only I know what was allegedly changed, how do you?

184

Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?

185

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?[/quote]

Because more men are born than women, and a bunch of women belonging to one man is not a recipe for social stability. But since we’re allowing men to marry one another, there’s no logical reason why polygamy shouldn’t be allowed.

And that’s precisely what we’ll see in a few years. The destabilizing influence it will have on society with our sudden redefinition of marriage will be interesting to watch.

The gays will find that their new found ‘rights’ will collide with the rights demanded by another minority. That minority is much less tolerant than is the West they’ve so often vilified for its cultural Christianity.

186

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Because more men are born than women, and a bunch of women belonging to one man is not a recipe for social stability. But since we’re allowing men to marry one another, there’s no logical reason why polygamy shouldn’t be allowed.[/quote]

Come to Wellington. 3:1 ratio. In our favor. But still don’t really see what the issue with polygamy is. How is social stability undermined?

Interesting idea. But again, how do you suggest that polygamy will create a destabilizing effect?

Implied homophobia aside, what other minority of less tolerance are you talking about? If you meant Islam, I’ll just preemptively point out that Muslims are hardly a minority.

187

Well, what happens when the ratio of men to women is further skewed by a bunch of women belonging to one man, repeated on a large scale? You have a bunch of testosterone-fueled young men out for fame, respect, and glory any way they can get it so that they can stand out from other men to an artificially small pool of women.

Aside from that, how many first-world countries do we know of that have polygamy as a value?

I’m hardly being homophobic by pointing any of this out. Read Bruce Bawer’s book. He’s gay.

188

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?

Because more men are born than women, and a bunch of women belonging to one man is not a recipe for social stability. But since we’re allowing men to marry one another, there’s no logical reason why polygamy shouldn’t be allowed.

And that’s precisely what we’ll see in a few years. The destabilizing influence it will have on society with our sudden redefinition of marriage will be interesting to watch.

The gays will find that their new found ‘rights’ will collide with the rights demanded by another minority. That minority is much less tolerant than is the West they’ve so often vilified for its cultural Christianity.

If that is the type of source that you think is a credible information on Islam, then I can see why you have the current opinions that you do.

Also studies show that currently there are more men alive yes, but women live longer then men (8 out of 10 people over 100 years of age are women - just as an example), and given the amount of men in jail, prison, the armed forces, etc, there are realistically more women out there ready to get married then men.

189

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Hey, I didn’t bring up this Kindergarden B.S. This is the political Thread, not the gossip thread.

You want to talk issues, I’m all for it.

The truth is, you can not prove it because Lixy’s accusations are not true. Next time I edit something with out “-edit” please bring it to my attention.

I will not be holding my breath.

-edit, or replying to this bunch of crap any further.

-edit, my final thoughts on this: if only I know what was allegedly changed, how do you?

[/quote]

I want to talk issues. That is what I have been doing this entire thread. You are not. You still haven’t replied to my issues that I brought up. And yeah I can’t prove they are true - but guess what? Anyone following this thread will be able to. And by your responses, you are throwing away any bit of credibility that you left.

This is the political thread - so its important that you don’t go around changing something that yuo said earlier on - because in issues like these that is never helpful for the discussion and will give very flawed view of things to those reading this thread.

Also - what I mean to say is that only you are able to know exactly what you wrote before, and what you wrote now. But me and a few others know that you at least went through the process of changing posts without tagging why/what was changed. And that gives you zero credibility.

190

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Well, what happens when the ratio of men to women is further skewed by a bunch of women belonging to one man, repeated on a large scale? You have a bunch of testosterone-fueled young men out for fame, respect, and glory any way they can get it so that they can stand out from other men to an artificially small pool of women.[/quote]

I meant there is three women to every man.

But that aside, you’re only looking at it in terms of MFF (Male/Female/Female) and completely overlooking MMF. There is balance there. While I don’t entirely understand how, there are bisexual men out there.

And saying that, I’d like to also state that I’ve never seen polygamy work out where there isn’t a level of sexual attraction between all parties involved. Every other “open” relationship I’ve seen has usually crashed and burned due mostly to insecurity of one or more parties.

Good point, but a lot of people I know don’t understand why marrying multiple partners is illegal. I have friends with two girlfriends. Not always a storybook relationship, but it works. And they live in NZ.

And consider the rate of infidelity in the “first world”. That’s hardly monogamy.

Sorry. I just read it that way, so my bad.

191

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?[/quote]

I am personally opposed to the practice on moral grounds. I do recognize however that, in some cases, it may be beneficial to society. Such cases include periods of scarce semen (following a war for example) or low populations. But the way polygamy devolved into a patriarchal tool where harem’s are created for man’s pleasure is just unacceptable in my eyes.

From an Islamic perspective, that was exactly the context where verse 4:3 was revealed (i.e: right after the “battle of the trenches”). It goes like this: “If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.” – Quran 4:3

Some verses later, God shows us that the practice is to be greatly discouraged and is only for extreme cases:

“Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire” – Quran 4:129

So here we have a commandment about about only marrying many wives if you can treat them justly, and in the same surah, we are told that we won’t be able to even we tried. That perfectly embodies the complexities of life and the tough choices inherent to it.

For all the bashing I do of the king of Morocco, I should give the guy credit for making polygamy all but illegal a couple of years ago. The practice now requires the input of the woman. Only if your wife can testify she is not opposed to sharing, can you marry another one. The most ardent defenders of their rights to have harems include the infamous Wahabis (i.e: the Al-Sauds and the folks gravitating around them). In most Arab countries, it is extremely rare and in many majority-Muslim countries, it is downright illegal (think Turkey, Tunisia, etc.)

192

[quote]lixy wrote:
But the way polygamy devolved into a patriarchal tool where harem’s are created for man’s pleasure is just unacceptable in my eyes.[/quote]

Agreed. That is very wrong and I for one think polygamy is only for those who can give equal attention and affection to the other people in the relationship.

But you can’t say polygamy doesn’t work as a blanket statement - it can work. But it comes down to whether or not the people in the relationship can handle sharing.

193

[quote]Makavali wrote:
lixy wrote:
But the way polygamy devolved into a patriarchal tool where harem’s are created for man’s pleasure is just unacceptable in my eyes.

Agreed. That is very wrong and I for one think polygamy is only for those who can give equal attention and affection to the other people in the relationship.

But you can’t say polygamy doesn’t work as a blanket statement - it can work. But it comes down to whether or not the people in the relationship can handle sharing.[/quote]

To answer your initial question, polygamy is the cultural norm, monogamy is an aberration.

What is also quite common in polygamous societies is to raid other villages to kill men and take their women.

The natural state seems to be a situation where the strongest and most determined men have all the women and the weak masturbate.

That is not exactly a model for a peaceful society and though it seems to be a male fantasy actually very few men would benefit whereas women would have won the lottery because they´d get a man, how ugly or stupid they may be.

194

[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?

Because more men are born than women, and a bunch of women belonging to one man is not a recipe for social stability. But since we’re allowing men to marry one another, there’s no logical reason why polygamy shouldn’t be allowed.

And that’s precisely what we’ll see in a few years. The destabilizing influence it will have on society with our sudden redefinition of marriage will be interesting to watch.

The gays will find that their new found ‘rights’ will collide with the rights demanded by another minority. That minority is much less tolerant than is the West they’ve so often vilified for its cultural Christianity.

If that is the type of source that you think is a credible information on Islam, then I can see why you have the current opinions that you do.

Also studies show that currently there are more men alive yes, but women live longer then men (8 out of 10 people over 100 years of age are women - just as an example), and given the amount of men in jail, prison, the armed forces, etc, there are realistically more women out there ready to get married then men.
[/quote]

I don’t think adopting the marital practices of the ancient Near East is going to cultivate a culture that continues to produce wealth and freedom.

Aside from Bruce Bawer’s polemic, there are plenty of other available sources on Islam’s persecution of homosexuals (when they’re not practicing it themselves.) There’s the pictures of the boys being hung by the neck from a crane for supposedly being homosexual in Iran.

Then there’s the homosexual Iranian’s who’ve fled to Canada and now speak out on it. There are plenty of reports of the Taliban executing them, and it is a capital offense in Saudi Arabia.

195

[quote]orion wrote:
Makavali wrote:
lixy wrote:
But the way polygamy devolved into a patriarchal tool where harem’s are created for man’s pleasure is just unacceptable in my eyes.

Agreed. That is very wrong and I for one think polygamy is only for those who can give equal attention and affection to the other people in the relationship.

But you can’t say polygamy doesn’t work as a blanket statement - it can work. But it comes down to whether or not the people in the relationship can handle sharing.

To answer your initial question, polygamy is the cultural norm, monogamy is an aberration.

What is also quite common in polygamous societies is to raid other villages to kill men and take their women.

The natural state seems to be a situation where the strongest and most determined men have all the women and the weak masturbate.

That is not exactly a model for a peaceful society and though it seems to be a male fantasy actually very few men would benefit whereas women would have won the lottery because they´d get a man, how ugly or stupid they may be.[/quote]

Good post.

196

ohh come on guys i leave you for a month and come to find this ??? hey mak , Gkhan and lixy . what’s going on? this threaf is growing fast.

197

[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
And that gives you zero credibility.[/quote]

Believe whatever you want, Mr. 115 posts.

Drop it already!

198

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
mafzal4 wrote:
And that gives you zero credibility.

Believe whatever you want, Mr. 115 posts.

Drop it already!

[/quote]

lol! Somehow the fact that I have ‘only’ 115 posts makes me have no credibility? Somehow your logic eludes me (and I would imagine a whole lot of other people as well).

And no I won’t drop it. It’s simply decietful and wrong to edit posts in a thread such as this one without stating why you are doing so/what is being changed. The fact that you even had to go back and edit posts in the first place says a lot about your posts. Oh, and please look back at my previous posts in response to you where I’ve repeatedly asked you to answer to my other issues that I raised.

199

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Believe whatever you want, Mr. 115 posts.

Drop it already![/quote]

Actually he has 116 posts. No wait… 117 …118 …119

200

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Wow, this thread devolved fast. I propose taking a step back.

Why is polygamy illegal?

Because more men are born than women, and a bunch of women belonging to one man is not a recipe for social stability. But since we’re allowing men to marry one another, there’s no logical reason why polygamy shouldn’t be allowed.

And that’s precisely what we’ll see in a few years. The destabilizing influence it will have on society with our sudden redefinition of marriage will be interesting to watch.
…
[/quote]

The first part is right on the money.
Polygamy [for practical purposes, we’re talking about polygyny, which is way more dominant then polyandry]cannot be integrated into our idea of society.
The scond part is pure nonsense.
One gay person can marry…another …one… person.
The sky is not falling? They can marry horses, trees or hamsters (one at a time, please) for all I care!

The thing that is changing is something entirely different. As woman in the western hemisphere slowly regain power, archaic, patriarchal mindsets also collide with our view of society. The outcome will be interesting.