I think eating at KFC as a kid I liked the buttermilk bisquits, and cole slaw about as good as the chicken.
Now that I can MAKE bisquits that good, and grilled chicken that's better, eating out there has lost all appeal.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Secular arguments against poly
- Thread starter DeathIsNotTheEnd
- Start date
Now that I can MAKE bisquits that good, and grilled chicken that's better, eating out there has lost all appeal.
Wait, KFC in the States serves scones? We don't get that here.
Does KFC serve potato and gravy in the States, or is that the NZ substitute for that part of the menu?
Hahaha, none of you get a cup of rice with your KFC meal like in the Philippines!
Nearing midnight here so guessing you have about 10 hours or so...Yeah, that light you see at the end of the tunnel.... it's the Midnight Express coming at you sooooo.... .
Polygamy is bad because if you had two wives and all their kids you couldn't afford to take the whole family to KFC.
See? We weren't derailed at all, just building the groundwork for a solid secular argument.
See? We weren't derailed at all, just building the groundwork for a solid secular argument.
Having read through the paper quickly my response relates to the statement made in the third paragraph which reads as follows;Alright so, I haven't thought about this in a while, but months ago my brother made a big stink and got into a huge argument with me about poly. He had no interest in debating Biblical teachings, but instead brought up 'secular' arguments of why poly is bad. In particular he cited this study:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2012-01-monogamy-major-social-problems-polygamist.amp
With no desire to court debate simply for debate's sake, I'm wondering if some of the INTJ types on this forum would be willing to tackle a logic-based response to these assertions made in this study?
(PS: you'll earn yourself some baked cookies as thanks for me not having to do it myself)
"Our goal was to understand why monogamous marriage has become standard in most developed nations in recent centuries, when most recorded cultures have practiced polygyny," says UBC Prof. Joseph Henrich, a cultural anthropologist, referring to the form of polygamy that permits multiple wives, which continues to be practiced in some parts of Africa, Asia, the Middle East and North America.
My response is simple.
The reason why monogamous marriages have become standard is because of the spread of so called democracy from the west, which has its roots in greco roman legal and societal structures that introduced the law of bigamy in 285AD.
It is very easy to introduce the bible back into the conversation when one understands that much of roman law was brought in to honour their gods which in the case of bigamy is the goddess Juno aka Hera in Greek society aka Diana in the book of Acts aka the Queen of heaven in the tanakh.
There is alot more that I can say but in short that is why this study in my reckoning is in short nonsensical and more like a propaganda piece than serious research..
I'm not the Biblical scholar some of you are so bear with me on this:
Part of why I think Christians in particular are mostly monogamous is because much of Scripture refers to Christ and his bride the church. This language would tend to set the way for monogamous marriage.
Not legally, not like a commandment or anything. It just got people thinking of one man and one woman. Then when church authorities started encouraging monogamy it was easily compared to Christ having one wife with the church.
Just my thought.
Part of why I think Christians in particular are mostly monogamous is because much of Scripture refers to Christ and his bride the church. This language would tend to set the way for monogamous marriage.
Not legally, not like a commandment or anything. It just got people thinking of one man and one woman. Then when church authorities started encouraging monogamy it was easily compared to Christ having one wife with the church.
Just my thought.
I appreciate your thoughts here and I could agree with your thinking @MeganC if one starts with a monogamous position and reads that into the Bible. However, there is no number ever given by God for marriage/wives anywhere in the Bible, so I think most Christians are like I was; we're told to believe in monogamy-only and that yes, Christ has His bride; the church and that sets "the way for monogamous marriage" so we believe it. We believe it because we were told it's what we should believe so we "see" monogamy-only in the Bible. Christians believe in monogamy-only because they are taught to be monogamous-only, not because they first see it in the Bible. In cultures and countries where monogamy-only isn't taught, any number of wives for Christian men is normal - as it is for non-Christian men.
Interestingly, @MeganC , the 'church is the bride of Christ' may not have as much support as generally thought. Jerusalem as the bride has much more support. The closest we get is Rev. 19:7, but the Greek says 'woman' (gune) not 'bride.'
A better understanding, more consistent with Scripture, is that Messiah has two brides, the house of Judah and the divorced house of Israel. Jeremiah 3:6-12; 31:31-34; Romans 7:1-4; and Ezekiel 23:1-6ff. Both Christendom and Judaism claim to be THE bride when in fact Scripture is a poly story from beginning to end.
Here's an article with all the details:
The ‘One Bride (of Messiah)’ Myth
Christendom (including most Hebrew roots/Torahkeepers, etc) and Judaism (including most Messianic Jews) share in a ‘one bride’ doctrine that is not supported by Scripture, though most h…
natsab.com
I have read a tonne of the arguments against polygamy from the secular point of view and generally find them to be invalid strawmen.
Perhaps it is my bias but I have a hard time finding a hole that they can poke in my own vision of polygamy ie naught but adults, all consenting and entering into the relationship with eyes open and full disclosure of the situation by/to all parties and all focused on the wellbeing of any children that are a part of the marriage.
I see no more potential for abuse, laws being broken or neglect than with monogamy. In point of fact I see significantly less potential for problems if we function under the assumption that all parties are of good will and committed to the group. These are people who are really explicitly family and marriage focused after all.
I legitimately don't see or understand the problem that the antipolygamy types have with the dynamic beyond the not all men will get a woman claim.
The easy counter is that historically there are vastly more women than men in the genetic record. This not only supports the idea that polygamy is and always has been the default normal for humanity but that it is unrealistic to imagine that all of human history should be pushed back on to keep a unsuccessful or uninterested segment in the reproductive pool. If they want to have a wife and family, then the burden of finding that circumstances is upon their shoulders and giving them a leg up is not something that should come from government fiat.
I may be the odd man out here on religion but even i am familiar with the notion that God helps those who help themselves.
Perhaps it is my bias but I have a hard time finding a hole that they can poke in my own vision of polygamy ie naught but adults, all consenting and entering into the relationship with eyes open and full disclosure of the situation by/to all parties and all focused on the wellbeing of any children that are a part of the marriage.
I see no more potential for abuse, laws being broken or neglect than with monogamy. In point of fact I see significantly less potential for problems if we function under the assumption that all parties are of good will and committed to the group. These are people who are really explicitly family and marriage focused after all.
I legitimately don't see or understand the problem that the antipolygamy types have with the dynamic beyond the not all men will get a woman claim.
The easy counter is that historically there are vastly more women than men in the genetic record. This not only supports the idea that polygamy is and always has been the default normal for humanity but that it is unrealistic to imagine that all of human history should be pushed back on to keep a unsuccessful or uninterested segment in the reproductive pool. If they want to have a wife and family, then the burden of finding that circumstances is upon their shoulders and giving them a leg up is not something that should come from government fiat.
I may be the odd man out here on religion but even i am familiar with the notion that God helps those who help themselves.
I'm going to add that society is all horrified at the idea of younger women joining families. But then they have no problem with them being trafficked by politically connected people, being encouraged to be promiscuous, and then celebrating the horror of abortion.
They're not worried about young women being abused in poly marriages. They're worried that they won't be able to abuse these young women.
They're not worried about young women being abused in poly marriages. They're worried that they won't be able to abuse these young women.
Yes, pure selfishness by those most affected with the potential loss of opportunity to take advantage of the young women.
You know.... I have noticed a different attitude towards younger women vs middle aged or older women in polygamy. There is a lot more resistance to the idea for younger women. An attitude that says don't waste your life, he is just after you for sex (in an era where single women act like teenage boys about the idea of new sex partner, ok sure thing lumphead), you should be out there climbing a corporate ladder not having kids with some weirdo etc etc...
Middle aged to older women the attitude seems more likely to be luke warm to a shrug. She has had her fun, now she may as well have some security and company and maybe she is allergic to cats so she can't just have a tonne of them in an apartment alone and maybe these weirdos are better than nothing.
It is very plain though that the younger women are reduced down to the value of sexual access and how it is being wasted in polygamy. Really creepy now that I think about it.
Adult relations are a great part of a marriage but if that is the focus and motivation then I would predict failure and that they are aiming at plural marriage for entirely the wrong reasons.
Middle aged to older women the attitude seems more likely to be luke warm to a shrug. She has had her fun, now she may as well have some security and company and maybe she is allergic to cats so she can't just have a tonne of them in an apartment alone and maybe these weirdos are better than nothing.
It is very plain though that the younger women are reduced down to the value of sexual access and how it is being wasted in polygamy. Really creepy now that I think about it.
Adult relations are a great part of a marriage but if that is the focus and motivation then I would predict failure and that they are aiming at plural marriage for entirely the wrong reasons.
That's interesting to consider but it may stem more from your culture there and first-world country morality(?)