Survivalist Forum banner

Montana polygamist family applies for marriage license

9.8K views 220 replies 55 participants last post by  LibShooter  
#1 ·
http://www.krtv.com/story/29450937/montana-polygamist-family-applies-for-marriage-license

Liberal gay rights knickers in a wad about it :D:

Excerpt:

If you want to argue that polygamy and marriage equality are the same thing, well, they’re not. If you want respect for how consenting adults arrange their households, though, you’ve got it. That does not however mean that because one group that has fought for friggin’ decades for basic recognition and respect finally has achieved something, that every fringe group — and yeah, sister wife families, you are fringe — gets a piece of the action too.

-----

From the National Review: Polygamy- Gay Marriage Supports Struggle To Make a Case Against It

---

I've really never been upset about the idea. The only time the Bible speaks about a "husband of one wife" is in regard to pastors. And there's a stat in the NR article that throughout history, 85% of cultures practiced it. Heck, I might marry now if I can split the job of putting up with a husband with another woman. :D:

What's tickling me is that the articles above show liberal hypocrisy and their narcissism. How dare anyone else steal their show!!!:rolleyes:
 
#3 ·
http://www.krtv.com/story/29450937/montana-polygamist-family-applies-for-marriage-license

Liberal knickers in a wad about it :D:

Excerpt:

If you want to argue that polygamy and marriage equality are the same thing, well, they’re not. If you want respect for how consenting adults arrange their households, though, you’ve got it. That does not however mean that because one group that has fought for friggin’ decades for basic recognition and respect finally has achieved something, that every fringe group — and yeah, sister wife families, you are fringe — gets a piece of the action too.

From the National Review: Polygamy- Gay Marriage Supports Struggle To Make a Case Against It

---

I've really never been upset about the idea. The only time the Bible speaks about a "husband of one wife" is in regards to pastors. And there's a stat in the NR article that throughout history, 85% of cultures practiced it. Heck, I might marry now if I can split the job of putting up with a husband with another woman. :D:

What's tickling me is that the articles above show such liberal hypocrisy and their narcissism. How dare anyone else steal their show!!!:rolleyes:
I get your point.

At the end of the day though it would still be a contract between consenting adults. Whether multiple parties are involved or not.
 
#5 ·
The progressives will claim that they are against it right now, but when the fight gets closer to being over, they'll flip sides and pretend they've been fighting for it for "friggin'" decades.

Liars and hypocrites the progressives are.
 
#13 ·
Who wants more than one wife?!

Okaaaaaaay, how about a line up similar to Charliese Theron, Cathrine Bell and perhaps a Lilly Evangalene?! --not the fat bag of guts women that this guy has on that reality show.

I could go for this.
Could I keep up with the demands?

Hmmmmm--?!
One could try.

But seriously--it's the financial demands that are the killer.
Multiple wives, children, costs and so forth. It would be a back breaker.
And talk about the shoes these women would want.... Jeeze!!

But if people want to do it, who are we to stop them?
 
#83 ·
But seriously--it's the financial demands that are the killer.
Multiple wives, children, costs and so forth.
Actually from a Darwinian perspective that is a huge benefit.

The brightest/most successful men can afford multiple wives and therefore produce the more children with similar traits. Course that is based on the idea that the men actually SUPPORT their wives/children.
 
#110 ·
But it will be the muzzies that push it through... Cultural sensitivity and all that crap.

There is a school of thought that posits polygamy as being a win for women.
In many cultures a woman would be better off being the fourth wife of a rich man, than the only wife of a poor man.
The downside is that it crowds out a large number of young, usually poorer, men from the ability to win a wife. Then you get lot's of angry, unloved, young men, and poof - we're the Middle East.

I can also see the lawyers wanting this... imagine the divorce cases! :rolleyes:
 
#30 ·
(1) If you are looking for a Christian reason to oppose polygamy, there isn't one. So, as far as moral outrage goes, this one is a feather compared to homosexuality that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all oppose.

(2) Liberals have supported serial polygamy (endless divorce and remarriage) for years, as well as "open" marriages, affairs, etc - so they have no moral opposition to the sexual licence of it.

(3) The tax issue is a field of thorns, however, and THAT is what they hope to avoid, because to save taxes a government will ban anything, and if poly = ****, and poly is banned over taxes, that washes back to **** in the same way **** is washing to poly.

(4) Not only taxes, but benefits become an issue as well. I could add three wives and seven children and not feel much poorer (two more cars, more clothes, a bit more food, and a bunk house out back in expense). I would then, however, have no more income taxes, food stamps for over a dozen, and that is without any of them holding jobs. Two of the wives could have jobs and the wage averaging would still be a huge advantage.

(5) Throughout their whining campaign, the homosexuals said there was no slippery slope. Any slippery slope proves that their lies were lies.

(6) With polygamy, you cheapen marriage as a publicly accepted institution. They wanted not the rights of marriage, or else they would have accepted Civil Union. They wanted the normalcy, social esteem, and acceptance of traditional marriage. The more who get in on it, the less the word marriage means, and the less of what they really want (normalization of their perversion) they get.

It is like the Beverly Hillbillies. So long as it is only them, there is esteem for where they are at, even if they do not deserve it. If the rest of Arkansas, however, moved in, being in the Beverly Hills would cease to mean exclusivity and would then mean nothing more than living in Arkansas did.
 
#39 ·
#43 ·
Frig em young, knock em all up, then let uncle Sam pick up the tab. That's how we roll in AmeriKA. What's the difference between these people and the ghetto daddies who knock up a dozen baby mamas and then split? The polygamist lives with the baby mamas while the gang bangers move from one government financed crib to another. In the end, the tax payers wind up paying for their respective "flocks."
 
#50 ·
I told you guys, make some popcorn, sit back and enjoy! It will get freakier and freakier, Just like the death throes of a wounded animal, more intense and violent the nearer to the culmination. The only thing more amusing than the overall situation will be the boob tube pundits doing the blame tapdance.

And dont worry about the 2016 elections. Voting on the new president is tantemount to electing a new captain of the Titanic an hour after she hit the iceberg.... hmmmm I need to buy some more ammo.
 
#54 ·
To the poster that says divorce is rampant amoungst Christians...I will say that there are many divorced folks in our church; however, 1. they divorced when they were young and stupid 2. spouse left them (abandonment) or 3. they divorced before they were even believers.

I never look at a moment in time or a past sin when evaluating a person's spirituality. I wouldn't even look at a homosexual that way. I look at the last 20 years that they've been living for the Lord in consistent Christian living.

Back to the OP...all manner and forms of sexual perversions will be coming to America soon enough.
 
#55 ·
To the poster that says divorce is rampant amoungst Christians...I will say that there are many divorced folks in our church; however, 1. they divorced when they were young and stupid 2. spouse left them (abandonment) or 3. they divorced before they were even believers.
I can see #3 as a valid reason, and #2 if it involved adultery on the part of the partner who did the abandoning, but I've never read anywhere in scripture that you get biblical divorce passes for marrying when young and stupid.