View Poll Results: What say you?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. All humans should be protected under the law.

    27 27.84%
  • No. Marriage is between one man and one woman, period.

    20 20.62%
  • No. Only homosexuals and heterosexuals should be allowed to marry.

    6 6.19%
  • I don’t care what they do as long as they stay out of my business.

    34 35.05%
  • My cat’s name is Mittens.

    10 10.31%
Page 29 of 73 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 725

Thread: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

  1. #281
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    I didn't think it necessary to quote the entirety of your prior response since it was very long. I did read it all though.

    While I appreciate your position as a member of the predominant Mormon faith, it is nonetheless merely the typical "political statement" made by any "parent faith" in reference to every "breakaway sect," including your example of the "Catholic church."
    I don't think anyone would rationally try to argue that Lutherans are Catholics. The term “Catholic” refers to a specific organization, with a specific leadership and structure, and a formal body of established doctrine and practice. Only members of that organization are Catholics. Martin Luther had serious disagreements with the Catholic leadership in his time, and with some of the practices and doctrines of the Catholic church as it existed at that time, so be left that church, and eventually went on to found a new church which bears his name. The Lutheran church is a direct splinter off of the Catholic church, and does retain some of the distinctive practices and doctrines of the Catholic church,but it is not part of the organization that is the Catholic church,it rejects the leadership of the Pope and the other members of the Catholic hierarchy, and it rejects some of the essential doctrines and practices of Catholicism. Lutherans are not Catholics, and no rational person would try to argue that they are.

    Like the Catholic church, but unlike some other religion, the Mormon church has a very clearly-defined organization with a clearly-defined leadership structure, and a clearly-defined set of established doctrines and practices. The exact history of the FLDS is unclear, but apparently some time in or around 1913 a small group of people had disagreements with the Mormon church, it's leaders, and some of the practices and policies of that time, and so they broke off and started a number of other churches, one of which developed into what is now the FLDS. Like the Lutherans, they rejected the Mormon organization, the Mormon leaders, and some essential Mormon doctrines and practices, in order to form a new religion. The FLDS and any similar organizations which may exist today are not part of the Mormon organization. They reject the Mormon prophet, the Mormon leaders, the Mormon organization, and many essential Mormon doctrine and practices. They are not Mormons any more than the Lutherans are Catholics.

    There are some religions which are vague enough in structure, organization, leadership, and doctrine that it is possible for some to drift from the historical base of that religion, form new teachings and doctrines and organizational structures that are not part of the larger body of that religion, and still reasonably call themselves by the name of the parent religion and consider themselves still to be a part thereof. Mormonism is not such a religion. Mormonism has a very clearly established organization, structure, leadership, and set of doctrines and practices; and any group that breaks away from that (as several have) is no longer Mormon.


    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Basically you, and your fellow "predominants" deny the sect is Mormon. They, the "sect," say they are the "true Mormons" and that the "predominants" have fallen from the way.
    In those jurisdictions where our trademark on the name is upheld, calling themselves “Mormon” anything would get these other groups sued for violating that trademark. The nature of trademark law is such that we'd have no choice but to sue in order to protect the trademark.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  2. #282
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    I don't think anyone would rationally try to argue that Lutherans are Catholics. The term “Catholic” refers to a specific organization, with a specific leadership and structure, and a formal body of established doctrine and practice. Only members of that organization are Catholics.

    ...In those jurisdictions where our trademark on the name is upheld, calling themselves “Mormon” anything would get these other groups sued for violating that trademark. The nature of trademark law is such that we'd have no choice but to sue in order to protect the trademark.
    Again, please forgive me for not including your entire passage in the quote. As before, I did read it all.

    I'm sorry for the need to correct you again but the term "catholic" merely means "universal," in that being the first church established in support of the teachings of Christ Jesus, purportedly founded by the Apostle Peter (the Rock upon which I will build My Church), it claims to be the one and only Universal Church.

    Of course, any group claiming to represent the true faith in Jesus Christ is technically just a breakaway sect of this Universal Church. (I am not Catholic btw.) So while Lutherans might not say they are "Catholics" in point of fact they are, just members who refuse to accept certain tenets (like Papal authority, confession, the permanence of marriage, saints and idoletry, etc.).

    I know that you mention "mormon practices" most of which are secret. I do not claim to be an expert on the Mormon faith (although I have studied some of it's history) but since these mormon practices are secret, aside from retaining polygamy and rejecting the authority of the main church Prophets since breaking away, how would you know if they don't adhere to the essential tenets of the Mormon faith?

    As for trademark infringement? What church needs to trademark their name? That's a purely civil issue, don't you believe in the separation of church and state?
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 06-25-13 at 02:00 AM.

  3. #283
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Again, please forgive me for not including your entire passage in the quote. As before, I did read it all.

    I'm sorry for the need to correct you again but the term "catholic" merely means "universal," in that being the first church established in support of the teachings of Christ Jesus, purportedly founded by the Apostle Peter (the Rock upon which I will build My Church), it claims to be the one and only Universal Church.
    The word “catholic” (not capitalized) does indeed mean “universal”, as you said. Capitalized, “Catholic” refers specifically to one organization and its members, which calls itself by that name based on its claim that it is that one “catholic” or “universal” church.


    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Of course, any group claiming to represent the true faith in Jesus Christ is technically just a breakaway sect of this Universal Church. (I am not Catholic btw.) So while Lutherans might not say they are "Catholics" in point of fact they are, just members who refuse to accept certain tenets (like Papal authority, confession, the permanence of marriage, saints and idoletry [sic], etc.).
    A “breakaway sect” of a church is no longer part of that church, and cannot even honestly be described as a “sect” of its parent church. It's a separate organization, entirely. I do not think that any Lutheran would claim to be “Catholic”,nor do I think that any Catholic would claim that Lutherans are Catholics. A member of either organization would fully recognize that they are two separate organizations, neither being part of the other, and that the name “Catholic” refers to one of these organizations, while the name “Lutheran” refers to the other organization.

    Who are you, being part of neither of those organizations, to make a claim about one of those organizations being part of the other, with which no actual member of either organization would agree?

    And no, it is not true that “any group claiming to represent the true faith in Jesus Christ is technically just a breakaway sect of this Universal Church [The Catholic Church]. This is true of the various Protestant churches, the Orthodox churches, and the Episcopalian churches (which I understand to be commonly included under Protestantism, but it seems to me that the history of the Episcopalian churches ought to establish them as being separate from the Protestant movement); but it is not true of the Mormon church or any of its offshoots, nor of certain other churches such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists.


    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    I know that you mention "mormon practices" most of which are secret. I do not claim to be an expert on the Mormon faith (although I have studied some of it's history) but since these mormon practices are secret, aside from retaining polygamy and rejecting the authority of the main church Prophets since breaking away, how would you know if they don't adhere to the essential tenets of the Mormon faith?
    You are mistaken about most Mormon practices being secret. I could point out other errors in your argument, here, but it all fails on this one, so there's no need. What is openly taught and practiced by the two different organizations is more than different enough to make it obvious to any rational observer that these are two entirely different religions, with two entirely different organizations; and that one is not in any way a subset of the other.


    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    As for trademark infringement? What church needs to trademark their name? That's a purely civil issue, don't you believe in the separation of church and state?
    I think the need should be obvious.

    As it is, with all the effort that we make to dissuade such abuse of the term “Mormon”, the reputation of our organization and our faith is constantly being damaged by the false connection made by the misuse of this name between us and other organizations which openly engage in unseemly practices that we do not approve of. It's the same concern that a certain widely-known fast food chain would have if I were to open a restaurant that sold bad-tasting hamburgers of very poor quality, prepared and served under unsanitary conditions, and otherwise violating common standards of the business, and I were to call my restaurant “McDonald's” and to use logos and livery that was similar to those of the well-known chain. The public would predictably, albeit incorrectly, tend to assume that what they experienced at my restaurant was representative of the well-know chain, which, in fact, had nothing to do with me and my restaurant; and this would be very damaging to that well-known chain. Both as a legal requirement to retain the trademark, and in order to protect their own reputation from unjust damage, the well-known chain would have no choice but to sue me for the violation of their trademark, and to take every legal measure to stop my continued misuse of it.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  4. #284
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    The word “catholic” (not capitalized) does indeed mean “universal”, as you said. Capitalized, “Catholic” refers specifically to one organization and its members, which calls itself by that name based on its claim that it is that one “catholic” or “universal” church.

    A “breakaway sect” of a church is no longer part of that church, and cannot even honestly be described as a “sect” of its parent church. It's a separate organization, entirely. I do not think that any Lutheran would claim to be “Catholic”,nor do I think that any Catholic would claim that Lutherans are Catholics. A member of either organization would fully recognize that they are two separate organizations, neither being part of the other, and that the name “Catholic” refers to one of these organizations, while the name “Lutheran” refers to the other organization.

    Who are you, being part of neither of those organizations, to make a claim about one of those organizations being part of the other, with which no actual member of either organization would agree?

    And no, it is not true that “any group claiming to represent the true faith in Jesus Christ is technically just a breakaway sect of this Universal Church [The Catholic Church]. This is true of the various Protestant churches, the Orthodox churches, and the Episcopalian churches (which I understand to be commonly included under Protestantism, but it seems to me that the history of the Episcopalian churches ought to establish them as being separate from the Protestant movement); but it is not true of the Mormon church or any of its offshoots, nor of certain other churches such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists.

    You are mistaken about most Mormon practices being secret. I could point out other errors in your argument, here, but it all fails on this one, so there's no need. What is openly taught and practiced by the two different organizations is more than different enough to make it obvious to any rational observer that these are two entirely different religions, with two entirely different organizations; and that one is not in any way a subset of the other.
    I'm sorry, but did they change the rules since the last time I visited Salt Lake City? When I was there I was told I could not enter the tabernacle during services, they were restricted to Mormons. I do apologize for the mis-statement about secrecy then, I misread something in one of your prior posts thatseemed to say that. Just tired I guess.

    Now Bob, you must know that many people don't consider the Mormon church "Christian." I've personally read your religious text and IMO it seems only tangentally to be related to Christianity. It's always seemed more akin to "Scientology" (and its tales of aliens in volcanos), or perhaps "Christian Science" (believing that the material world is an illusion) to me and people I have spoken to. (My apologies, but I felt I needed to say that.)

    I've also never met anyone not a Mormon who has categorized your church as "Christian," although I'm sure there are some people that do. However, most Christian church members of various churches I've visited over the years and around the country seem to consider Mormons at best some kind of apostate faith, and at worst worshipers of the anti-christ. That does not make it any less a valid religion though, regardless of such opinions.

    But I realize that nothing I can say will (or should) dissuade you from your position. I can only state again that it seems to me a Mormon calling another sect claiming to be "Mormon" not Mormon but something else...is like Oranges calling Naval Oranges apples. The fact that your church had to trademark it's name so it could sue? Now that is typical of my knowledge of the history of your church.

  5. #285
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    I'm sorry, but did they change the rules since the last time I visited Salt Lake City? When I was there I was told I could not enter the tabernacle during services, they were restricted to Mormons. I do apologize for the mis-statement about secrecy then, I misread something in one of your prior posts thatseemed to say that. Just tired I guess.
    You must be thinking of our Temples. The ceremonies that take place in our Temples are extremely sacred to us, and we generally do not discuss them with outsiders. This gives our enemies all sorts of license to make up all sorts of crazy stories about what goes on inside our Temples,and gives us little room to effectively refute them. You can find all sorts of accounts on the Internet of what supposedly happens in our Temples. Most of what you find will be outrageously inaccurate.* I won't say much more about the content of these ceremonies than to say that of the accounts you find on the net about them, the more bizarre and sinister any given account seems, the more incorrect it is likely to be, and the more mundane it seems, the more correct it is likely to be.

    But the Temple makes up only a small part of our practice. A typical active Mormon attends three hours of meetings every Sunday, at our regular church meetinghouses. These meetings are open to the public, and all are welcome. A really active Mormon, who lives near a Temple, would be likely to participate in the services there one or twice a month.

    The Tabernacle is a single, unique building, in Temple Square. It's not the same building as the Temple. You're surely heard of The Mormon Tabernacle Choir, so called because historically, the Tabernacle was where they usually performed. We used to have our semi-annual general conference meetings in the Tabernacle, but a much larger, more modern building was built some time within the last ten years or so for this purpose. The Tabernacle is generally open to the public.

    The Tabernacle is known for its exceptional acoustic characteristics, rather remarkable since nobody who was involved in designing and building it is known to have had the necessary knowledge to engineer a building with such acoustics. If a pin is dropped near the podium, the sound if it hitting the floor can be heard anywhere in the building.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Now Bob, you must know that many people don't consider the Mormon church "Christian." I've personally read your religious text and IMO it seems only tangentally to be related to Christianity. It's always seemed more akin to "Scientology" (and its tales of aliens in volcanos), or perhaps "Christian Science" (believing that the material world is an illusion) to me and people I have spoken to. (My apologies, but I felt I needed to say that.)

    I've also never met anyone not a Mormon who has categorized your church as "Christian," although I'm sure there are some people that do. However, most Christian church members of various churches I've visited over the years and around the country seem to consider Mormons at best some kind of apostate faith, and at worst worshipers of the anti-christ. That does not make it any less a valid religion though, regardless of such opinions.
    It stands to reason that any religion that holds certain beliefs is going to think that a different religion that holds beliefs that are incompatible with its own beliefs is wrong.

    We consider ourselves to be Christians, and it is undeniable to anyone with a correct understanding of our beliefs that we worship the same God, and revere the same Christ, that other Christians do. We do have some beliefs that are more different from those of other Christian sects than most other Christians sects are from one another, but nothing that is nearly so bizarre as those commonly attributed to Scientology, nothing as bizarre as some of the beliefs of the Christian Science group, and nothing nearly as bizarre as many of the beliefs that are often falsely attributed to us.


    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    But I realize that nothing I can say will (or should) dissuade you from your position. I can only state again that it seems to me a Mormon calling another sect claiming to be "Mormon" not Mormon but something else...is like Oranges calling Naval Oranges apples. The fact that your church had to trademark it's name so it could sue? Now that is typical of my knowledge of the history of your church.
    I've acknowledged that our beliefs and practices are more different from those of most mainstream Christian sects than most mainstream Christian sects are from one another. The FLDS are much more different from us than we are from most other Christian sects. We share some distant common historical roots, but we otherwise have nothing to do with them, and they have nothing to do with us. Catholics and Lutherans and Methodists and Episcopalians all have more to do with each other than we have to do with the FLDS; and yet nobody rationally tries to argue that Methodists are Lutherans, or that Episcopalians are Methodists, or that Catholics are Lutherans.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  6. #286
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by csense View Post
    You offer up a tautology, and you're calling me stupid.

    See my reply to Redress
    Not telling you that you are stupid. Telling you that you don't understand the issue. Very different.

    Neither is the term marriage or same sex marriage a sexual orientation. They are simply descriptive terms, nothing more. But if your point is that two men or two women need to have a certain sexual orientation in order to get married, then that would be discrimination, and discrimination is wrong isn't it. likewise, those in a polygamous marriage can have whatever sexual identity they want.
    And you continue to miss the point. Firstly, the government has a vested interest in sanctioning marriage. There are reasons why that happens... and these reasons are supported by research in regards to heterosexual and homosexual unions. They are NOT in regards to polygamous unions. Secondly, from an equality standpoint, it is argued that it is discriminatory towards homosexuals to not allow gay marriage. This is based on sexual ORIENTATION. Polygamy is not a sexual orientation.

    Like I said. You don't understand the issue.

    In short, sexual orientation is irrelevant with regard to whether SSM and polygamy are analogous. Unless of course, you plan on having a test for such things before people get married. If so, good luck with that.
    As I explained above, sexual orientation is completely relevant when discussing SSM and polygamy has no connection because it is not an orientation.

    So I've been told, yet, no one has refuted any of my arguments. You and others simply dismiss them offhand. You are, of course, free to do so, but it doesn't speak very well of your integrity
    Your arguments.... what little there is of an argument to examine, have been entirely refuted. Your denial of this is irrelevant to the accuracy of my statement.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  7. #287
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Lots of so-called "logical fallacies" are, IMHO, horse apples.


    You say "slippery slope fallacy". I say "Established Precedent"... precedent has considerable mojo in findings of law.


    And "slippery slope fallacy" never applies if someone is pushing.
    Since there is no equivalency, the logical fallacy is accurate. Precedent does not apply unless the situations are analogous... and here, they are not.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  8. #288
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    You must be thinking of our Temples. The ceremonies that take place in our Temples are extremely sacred to us, and we generally do not discuss them with outsiders. This gives our enemies all sorts of license to make up all sorts of crazy stories about what goes on inside our Temples,and gives us little room to effectively refute them. You can find all sorts of accounts on the Internet of what supposedly happens in our Temples. Most of what you find will be outrageously inaccurate.* I won't say much more about the content of these ceremonies than to say that of the accounts you find on the net about them, the more bizarre and sinister any given account seems, the more incorrect it is likely to be, and the more mundane it seems, the more correct it is likely to be.

    But the Temple makes up only a small part of our practice. A typical active Mormon attends three hours of meetings every Sunday, at our regular church meetinghouses. These meetings are open to the public, and all are welcome. A really active Mormon, who lives near a Temple, would be likely to participate in the services there one or twice a month.

    The Tabernacle is a single, unique building, in Temple Square. It's not the same building as the Temple. You're surely heard of The Mormon Tabernacle Choir, so called because historically, the Tabernacle was where they usually performed. We used to have our semi-annual general conference meetings in the Tabernacle, but a much larger, more modern building was built some time within the last ten years or so for this purpose. The Tabernacle is generally open to the public.

    The Tabernacle is known for its exceptional acoustic characteristics, rather remarkable since nobody who was involved in designing and building it is known to have had the necessary knowledge to engineer a building with such acoustics. If a pin is dropped near the podium, the sound if it hitting the floor can be heard anywhere in the building.



    It stands to reason that any religion that holds certain beliefs is going to think that a different religion that holds beliefs that are incompatible with its own beliefs is wrong.

    We consider ourselves to be Christians, and it is undeniable to anyone with a correct understanding of our beliefs that we worship the same God, and revere the same Christ, that other Christians do. We do have some beliefs that are more different from those of other Christian sects than most other Christians sects are from one another, but nothing that is nearly so bizarre as those commonly attributed to Scientology, nothing as bizarre as some of the beliefs of the Christian Science group, and nothing nearly as bizarre as many of the beliefs that are often falsely attributed to us.




    I've acknowledged that our beliefs and practices are more different from those of most mainstream Christian sects than most mainstream Christian sects are from one another. The FLDS are much more different from us than we are from most other Christian sects. We share some distant common historical roots, but we otherwise have nothing to do with them, and they have nothing to do with us. Catholics and Lutherans and Methodists and Episcopalians all have more to do with each other than we have to do with the FLDS; and yet nobody rationally tries to argue that Methodists are Lutherans, or that Episcopalians are Methodists, or that Catholics are Lutherans.
    I appreciate your thoughtful and tactful reply, especially in light of some of the remarks I made in my last post. You are a true gentleman, (even if you are an apostate!) That part in parenthesis was a joke.

    In all honesty, I understand your position and it must rankle to have a group which practices activities that most main-stream Americans disapprove of calling themselves Mormons and thereby bringing discredit upon your church. But your church is not alone in that problem, look at that horrible bunch of wackos who hate gays sooo much they defile the burial ceremonies of our honored dead soldiers. They call themselves Christian without any real understanding of the term.

    Be that as it may, you seem like a decent guy, pretty much like every Mormon I have had the pleasure of knowing. So I'll leave it at that.

  9. #289
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Why?
    Why not? Who are you to keep polygamists from enjoying the same rights you want homosexuals to have?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Your fear of what is different has nothing to do with whether it is good or not.
    Neither does yours. Stop trying to keep polygamists out of the tent.

  10. #290
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,998

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    And you continue to miss the point. Firstly, the government has a vested interest in sanctioning marriage. There are reasons why that happens... and these reasons are supported by research in regards to heterosexual and homosexual unions. They are NOT in regards to polygamous unions. Secondly, from an equality standpoint, it is argued that it is discriminatory towards homosexuals to not allow gay marriage. This is based on sexual ORIENTATION. Polygamy is not a sexual orientation.
    I am going to have to disagree with you on these points. First off, do you have any research that shows that polygamous marriages, not counting idiot cultist that throw pedophilia in with their marriages, counter these vested interest?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    The productive rearing of children is most important. Creating a stable family life is also key: it adds to the positive potential for healthy children, but it also creates healthy adults. There is plenty of evidence to support the theory that those who live in a healthy, stable, committed relationship, are happier, healthier, and are more productive members of society. These are all things that benefit the state.
    There is nothing about polygamy in any combination that would run counter to this. The fact that there are more adults to go to, in fact, would indicate that the child would have more options to talk to someone with whom they were comfortable with when problems arise, leading to more stability in their lives.

    Research shows that, regardless of sexual orientation, gay or straight, folks who live in these kinds of committed relationships, do better, and rear children better, than those who do not. This is regardless of sexual orientation.
    Again there is nothing about polygamy that runs counter to this point.

    And the answer to "why" is simple, and is psychological in nature. Jealousy, rivalry, and inconsistency.
    These things exist in monogamous as well as polygamous marriages, even without looking at outside relationship/affairs occurring.

    I will agree with you that the reasoning behind SSM should not be the same for the reasoning for polgamy, however, I will disagree with it not being an "orientation" for lack of a better term. Having been part of the poly community for quite a number of years, I have met people who would not be able to hold anything other than a monogamous relationship, those who will need poly relationships and those in between as well as those who want no romantic relationships. This parallels straight, gay and bi as well as asexual quite nicely as a analogy. Likewise, while individuals are attracted to these types of relationships, none require them for survival, any more than a given individual requires sex for survival.

Page 29 of 73 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •