Wedded 'throuples' coming to America. 'If marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, why limit it to 2 people?'

[Dexter]

Au contraire, you want to impose your views on the rest of us.  You want to dictate to those who believe in traditional marriage that we are wrong, narrow minded and seeking to harm innocent people and that we need to change.

The truth is the opposite of what you claim.

Why does believing in traditional marriage require you to interfere with the lives of other people? They don't want to put constraints on your life; it is only the opposite.

[andy58-in-nh]

That's impossible because most people throughout history were monogamous regardless of the society they lived in. That doesn't mean every successful society throughout history was dependent on monogamy. That is probably the biggest correlation = causation leap I have ever seen.

It's impossible because no such society existed or presently exists, and the reason is that no society ever survives that is at odds with fundamental human nature.

Subcultures may for a time, emerge and even flourish in societies whose customs and and laws tolerate them. 

But they remain as subcultures because human nature does not yield to the designs of those who forcibly seek to remake the world of human beings, much less to simple fashion.

[Dexter]

It's impossible because no such society existed or presently exists, and the reason is that no society ever survives that is at odds with fundamental human nature.

No, the reason is that most people were monogamous regardless of their society. Most people prefer monogamy, so a society in which most or all people are polygamous is extremely unlikely. The success or failure of societies throughout history had nothing to do with monogamy or polygamy.

[musiclady]

You're not the only poster I do that to. I do it because I like to pick your thoughts apart one by one.

I'm sorry you take it that way. I don't know of a more polite way to explain to you that you don't completely understand what I was getting at with my post.

Your posts seem to indicate otherwise.

Your entire argument for polygamy being unnatural was that emotions like anger and jealousy prevent it from being healthy/natural. I was simply pointing out that the people that prefer polygamy experience those emotions differently.

Actually you do need to prove that if you're going to make sweeping generalizations like "women are monogamous" and "polygamy doesn't work for women." Not all women are monogamous and polygamy does work for some of them.

You have absolutely no way to substantiate that claim. You're simply making assumptions because you don't understand how somebody else could be happy like that.

According to you it always does, so I'm okay with that.

There is no 'polite' way to tell people they're not bright enough to understand what you're saying, Dex.  Just say it outright.

Why did you leave out the parallel of a battered wife?  It completely dissolves your argument that women like to be in polygamous relationships and shows you don't really understand human nature at all.  All women in abusive relationships don't say they don't want to leave that relationship (unfortunately, most stay), but you cannot argue from that that women should stay in an abusive relationships, just because ALL don't say they object to it.

You feel free to make claims that, just because ALL women don't dislike polygamy (an argument that you cannot possibly know), that it is not against human nature for women to be in polygamous relationships, but you offer no proof whatsoever that your claims have even a shred of truth in them.  And might I add that, since you are male, you haven't got the foggiest idea of what women want.

What andy has argued here defends my point.  Polygamy is on the fringe of society, monogamy at the hub, because monogamy is what human nature requires, and polygamy is not.

Your emotional argument, as I have stated, is spurious, and there's no point in continuing to point that out to you.

On this subject, you are ineducable.

[andy58-in-nh]

No, the reason is that most people were monogamous regardless of their society. Most people prefer monogamy, so a society in which most or all people are polygamous is extremely unlikely. The success or failure of societies throughout history had nothing to do with monogamy or polygamy.

What you call a "preference" is a human imperative.  A polygamous or polyamorous or homosexual society will in time fail, as they always have, and for the same reason. If you want to fight nature, by all means, have at it. Just don't expect to change anything other than your own circumstances and fortunes.

[Dexter]

What you call a "preference" is a human imperative.  A polygamous or polyamorous or homosexual society will in time fail, as they always have, and for the same reason.

Can you give me an example of such a society?

[musiclady]

Why does believing in traditional marriage require you to interfere with the lives of other people? They don't want to put constraints on your life; it is only the opposite.

Why does believing in polygamous and homosexual 'marriage' require you to interfere with the lives of other people?  They DO want to put constraints on the lives of those who support traditional marriage, and they prove it nearly every day.

[Dexter]

There is no 'polite' way to tell people they're not bright enough to understand what you're saying, Dex.  Just say it outright.

I don't think you're dumb. We've been over this before.

Why did you leave out the parallel of a battered wife?

I didn't think it was fair to assume that women who say they're happy in polygamous relationships are brainwashed abuse victims. I disagree with your comparison.

You feel free to make claims that, just because ALL women don't dislike polygamy (an argument that you cannot possibly know), that it is not against human nature for women to be in polygamous relationships, but you offer no proof whatsoever that your claims have even a shred of truth in them.  And might I add that, since you are male, you haven't got the foggiest idea of what women want.

I know women in polygamous relationships and I know they are healthy and happy. Are you seriously going to contest that some women enjoy living a polygamous lifestyle? You know sometimes it is the woman that has many male partners, right? What do you think about that? Oh, and being female doesn't mean you know what other women want any more than my being male means I know what other men want.

What andy has argued here defends my point.  Polygamy is on the fringe of society, monogamy at the hub, because monogamy is what human nature requires, and polygamy is not.

Your emotional argument, as I have stated, is spurious, and there's no point in continuing to point that out to you.

On this subject, you are ineducable.

I'm bored now. I'm sure we'll find something else to disagree about before long.

[Dexter]

Why does believing in polygamous and homosexual 'marriage' require you to interfere with the lives of other people?

It doesn't. It requires you to be okay with how other people want to live their lives.

They DO want to put constraints on the lives of those who support traditional marriage, and they prove it nearly every day.

In what way are they hindering or restraining your lifestyle?

[musiclady]

It doesn't. It requires you to be okay with how other people want to live their lives.

In what way are they hindering or restraining your lifestyle?

I'm not hindering or restraining their lifestyle either, so your point makes no sense.

[Dexter]

I'm not hindering or restraining their lifestyle either, so your point makes no sense.

Uh, what? You support policies that would prevent them from getting married. That is a most definitely a hindrance to their lifestyle. You want to use the government to impose your will on the life of people that aren't doing anything to you.

[musiclady]

I don't think you're dumb. We've been over this before.

I didn't think it was fair to assume that women who say they're happy in polygamous relationships are brainwashed abuse victims. I disagree with your comparison.

I know women in polygamous relationships and I know they are healthy and happy. Are you seriously going to contest that some women enjoy living a polygamous lifestyle? You know sometimes it is the woman that has many male partners, right? What do you think about that? Oh, and being female doesn't mean you know what other women want any more than my being male means I know what other men want.

I'm bored now. I'm sure we'll find something else to disagree about before long.

I know we've 'been over this before' but you keep saying that the people who disagree with your posts just aren't bright enough to understand them, so in essence YOU keep bringing it up.

But since we're talking about misunderstanding (or are we talking about your just being obtuse?)  I didn't say that women in polygamous marriages were 'brainwashed abuse victims.'  It seems in order to 'win' your argument you need to make things up.  But you still didn't address the parallel (not that you'll be direct enough to ever do so).

As for your understanding what women want.  Pretty funny there.  (You DO amuse, Dex).   And once again, you make things up in order to "win" your non-existent argument....  I never contested that some women don't have problems with polygamy.  That doesn't make it 'normal.'  Some women enjoy cutting themselves and being beaten up during sex.  That doesn't make SM 'normal' either.

Actually, I'm glad you're bored.  It must be tiring to use the same old inane arguments day in and day out.

But at least you give others the opportunity to post the truth, so I guess your efforts are not completely worthless.....

Go watch some TV.   ^-^

[musiclady]

Uh, what? You support policies that would prevent them from getting married. That is a most definitely a hindrance to their lifestyle. You want to impose your will on the lives of people that aren't doing anything to you.

I thought you were bored.

Stop imposing your will on me.....

btw, your polygamous friends can add a hippopotamus to their threesome if they want to.  I'm not doing a thing to hinder them....

[EdinVA]

It doesn't. It requires you to be okay with how other people want to live their lives.

In what way are they hindering or restraining your lifestyle?

Dex, you are only looking at one facet of the issue.
For example the gay rights folks do things like force privately owned companies to do things the they do not agree with.. and forced the Boy Scouts to allow gay leaders.....

Their goal is not to just live their lives, they want total legislative acceptance...

[Dexter]

I know we've 'been over this before' but you keep saying that the people who disagree with your posts just aren't bright enough to understand them, so in essence YOU keep bringing it up.

That's not what I say and I think you know that.

But since we're talking about misunderstanding (or are we talking about your just being obtuse?)  I didn't say that women in polygamous marriages were 'brainwashed abuse victims.'  It seems in order to 'win' your argument you need to make things up.  But you still didn't address the parallel (not that you'll be honest enough to ever do so).

I don't think you drew a legitimate parallel. Your parallel assumes that there must be something wrong with women that claim to be happy in polygamous relationships. That's nonsense.

As for your understanding what women want.  Pretty funny there.  (You DO amuse, Dex).   And once again, you make things up in order to "win" your non-existent argument....  I never contested that some women don't have problems with polygamy.  That doesn't make it 'normal.'  Some women enjoy cutting themselves and being beaten up during sex.  That doesn't make SM 'normal' either.

Uncommon and unnatural are not the same thing. Polygamy isn't unnatural just because most people prefer monogamy.

Actually, I'm glad you're bored.  It must be tiring to use the same old inane arguments day in and day out.

But at least you give others the opportunity to post the truth, so I guess your efforts are not completely worthless.....

Go watch some TV.   ^-^

I'm glad you find value in my efforts.

[Dexter]

Dex, you are only looking at one facet of the issue.
For example the gay rights folks do things like force privately owned companies to do things the they do not agree with.. and forced the Boy Scouts to allow gay leaders.....

Homosexuals don't always do a great job of making their case. I don't support forcing a privately owned company to serve anybody for any reason. None of that means they shouldn't be allowed to marry.

Their goal is not to just live their lives, they want total legislative acceptance...

They want acceptance? You mean like, to be recognized as normal members of society like everybody else? How greedy of them.

[Dexter]

I thought you were bored.

So did I.

I'm not doing a thing to hinder them....

You mean other than supporting policies that would use the government to control aspects of their life?

[musiclady]

That's not what I say and I think you know that.

I don't think you drew a legitimate parallel. You parallel assumes that there must be something wrong with women that claim to be happy in polygamous relationships. That's nonsense.

Uncommon and unnatural are not the same thing. Polygamy isn't unnatural just because most people prefer monogamy.

I'm glad you find value in my efforts.

My parallel assumes no such thing.  Guess you just don't understand it, eh?

I 'assume' that since you think that uncommon and unnatural aren't the same, you don't think SM is a problem, or unnatural?  Just uncommon?

I mean, how far can we go with your 'there's nothing wrong with anything if there's a love promise involved?'  No limit to the perversion that you will call 'natural.'

That's why we can't go there, Dex.   People DO get hurt.  You just won't admit it.

[musiclady]

So did I.


You mean other than supporting policies that would use the government to control aspects of their life?

Stop assuming.....

That's why you fail in your debates.

As I said...... your polygamous buddies can add chimpanzees, horses, dogs, or anything they like to their ménage a trois, and I won't do a thing to hinder them.  They can cut each other, beat each other, handcuff each other, strangle each other, and I won't do a thing to stop them.

All I won't do is call what they do 'natural.'

[Dexter]

Stop assuming.....

That's why you fail in your debates.

My apologies. Does that mean you don't support policies that would stop homosexual and polygamous marriage?

As I said...... your polygamous buddies can add chimpanzees, horses, dogs, or anything they like to their ménage a trois, and I won't do a thing to hinder them.  They can cut each other, beat each other, handcuff each other, strangle each other, and I won't do a thing to stop them.

All I won't do is call what they do 'natural.'

I'll be sure to let them know.

[Dexter]

My parallel assumes no such thing.  Guess you just don't understand it, eh?

I guess I don't.

I 'assume' that since you think that uncommon and unnatural aren't the same, you don't think SM is a problem, or unnatural?  Just uncommon?

I don't have an issue with BDSM.

I mean, how far can we go with your 'there's nothing wrong with anything if there's a love promise involved?'  No limit to the perversion that you will call 'natural.'

That's why we can't go there, Dex.   People DO get hurt.  You just won't admit it.

I draw the line at things like pedophilia/rape. I care about people being victimized, not consenting adults living their life the way they want to.

[musiclady]

My apologies. Does that mean you don't support policies that would stop homosexual and polygamous marriage?

I'll be sure to let them know.

Aha............ there's where you got confused, Dex.  I do nothing to hinder their 'lifestyle' as you suggested.  I just don't want government to sanction their 'lifestyle' by calling it marriage (it's not).

And I don't want your buddies forcing me to endorse their lifestyle with a government sanction of said behavior.

Have a good evening, Dex.    Next time don't make so much stuff up.  You might actually win a point or two in the debate.

Though you'll never win the argument..........

[musiclady]

I guess I don't.

I don't have an issue BDSM.

I draw the line at things like pedophilia. I care about people being victimized, not consenting adults living their life the way they want to.

No fair drawing a line, Dex.  Stop imposing your will on people who just want to love who they love.

Bigot.

[mountaineer]

Another "I know you are but what am I" rounds of nonsensical circular discussion, folks.

[musiclady]

Another "I know you are but what am I" rounds of nonsensical circular discussion, folks.

But ain't it fun??