Polygamy

[Danmark]

Issue for debate:
"There is nothing inherently immoral or unbiblical about polygamy."

[Danmark]

In a private discussion the issue of polygamy and its morality emerged. In part I wrote:

'Polygamy is a form of marriage, as are same sex and opposite sex marriages.

Tho' I personally question the the practice, and can see a rational, secular basis for making it illegal, I don't see it is a moral issue. I believe I have previously questioned the Constitutional basis for banning polygamy. In fact I think the Mormon church was wrong to be cowed into changing its doctrine based on majority opinion or the desire for Statehood for Utah.

I can understand a State or the Feds limiting social security and other financial benefits to only two members of a marital community, if there is a rational, financial basis for such a restriction. But I think the State should otherwise stay out of such private matters. That is both my legal and my moral opinion, despite the fact I have personal reservations about polygamy in society today and consider it a potentially dysfunctional institution that invites abuse of men in the case of polyandry and the abuse of women in the case of polygyny.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 2 by Danmark]

For a plural marriage with regards to SS benefits perhaps a head of household type arrangement. Where when parties enter into a plural marriage that a HoH assignment is designated within the marriage license.

I agree though that legally speaking a plural marriage is much more complicated than to individuals. However, just because it is more complicated does not mean it cannot be done. I am sure there can be creative solutions to the complications that arise from a plural marriage/relationship.

For as many secular reasons against it you can find just as many for it. Biologically speaking studying the human genome reveals that the mating habits of homosapiens over time have typically been polygynous in nature.

[McCulloch]

[Replying to Danmark]

I would like to deal with the second part of the question first. Is there anything unbiblical about polygamy? 1 Timothy 3:2 proclaims that a bishop, superintendent, overseer, church’s supervisor, congregation leader, elder, church leader, pastor or episkopos be the husband of one wife, faithful to his wife, faithful in marriage, a man of one woman, have only one wife, be married to one wife only, committed to his wife, married only once, a one woman man, a man of one woman, anēr heis gynē. This restriction is explicitly given only to church leaders, elders or bishops in verse 2 and deacons in verse 12. Some churches believe that this passage requires that bishops be married to one and only one wife. Others believe that this passage teaches that bishops may be married, but to no more than one wife, that is a bishop may be single or married. Others, strangely enough, teach that bishops cannot marry. Martin Luther in a letter to the Saxon Chancellor Gregor Brück, Luther stated that he could not "forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict Scripture."

The Roman Catholic Church (one of the churches that prohibits bishops to marry at all) clearly condemns polygamy. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states "Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive."

The Old Testament of the Bible includes a few specific regulations on the practice of polygamy.
Exodus 21:10: "If he take another wife for himself; her food, her clothing, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish".
Deuteronomy 21:15–17, states that a man must award the inheritance due to a first-born son to the son who was actually born first, even if he hates that son's mother and likes another wife more;
Deuteronomy 17:17 states that the king shall not have too many wives without actually stating how many is too many.
Many important OT figures had more than one wife: Esau, Moses, Jacob, Elkanah, David and Solomon, with no explicit condemnation of the taking of a second wife.

Clearly polygyny is not unbiblical.
[/i]

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 4 by McCulloch]

The catholic church claims lots of things that are not biblical.

With regards to Timothy that is specific to leaders of a church and not the general populace.

To sum up my argument simply

The Torah includes specific regulations on the practice of polygamy,[3] such as Exodus 21:10, "If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights." Deuteronomy 21:15–17, says that a man must award the inheritance due to a first-born son to the son who was actually born first, even if he hates that son's mother and likes another wife more and Deuteronomy 17:17 states that the king shall not have too many wives.[4]

The first polygamist mentioned in the Bible is Lamech, whose two wives were Adah and Zillah (Genesis 4:19). Many important figures had more than one wife, such as Esau (Genesis 26:34; Genesis 28:6-9), Abraham (Genesis 16:3, Genesis 21:1-13, Genesis 25:1, Genesis 25:6), Moses (Exodus 2:21; Exodus 18:1-6, Numbers 12:1), Jacob (Genesis 29:15-28), Gideon (Judges 8:29-32), Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:1-8), David (1 Samuel 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:2-5; 2 Samuel 5:13-16) and Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-3).

Then again when has the bible ever contradicted itself right?

[Danmark]

One of the most interesting aspects of polygamy as authorized by religion is the LDS history of it. The LDS capitulation on the issue for political purposes is one of the clearest examples Mormon doctrine is controlled by men, not a god. They wanted Utah to become a State, so the belief had to change. Their own official statement on this is a laugher:

The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man to one woman is God’s standard, except at specific periods when He has declared otherwise.

In accordance with a revelation to Joseph Smith, the practice of plural marriage—the marriage of one man to two or more women—was instituted among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the early 1840s. Thereafter, for more than half a century, plural marriage was practiced by some Latter-day Saints. Only the Church President held the keys authorizing the performance of new plural marriages. In 1890, the Lord inspired Church President Wilford Woodruff to issue a statement that led to the end of the practice of plural marriage in the Church. In this statement, known as the Manifesto, President Woodruff declared his intention to abide by U.S. law forbidding plural marriage and to use his influence to convince members of the Church to do likewise.

Of course, they're wrong on the Bible's approach to this.

I don't mean to pick just on Mormons. Polygamy in general is a great example of how human culture determines what "God" decrees, not the other way around.

[SailingCyclops]

I can understand a State or the Feds limiting social security and other financial benefits to only two members of a marital community, if there is a rational, financial basis for such a restriction. But I think the State should otherwise stay out of such private matters.

Yes, the state should stay out of it ENTIRELY. I do not believe the state should be giving married folks more privilege than unmarried folks. I would take all referenced to "marriage" out of both statute law and IRS regulations. Why should a married person receive more benefits from the state than an unmarried person?

Get rid of the artificial state support for marriage, and then all forms of family units would be treated equally; as it should be in my opinion.

[SailingCyclops]

Clearly polygyny is not unbiblical.

Nor is it unconstitutional.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by Danmark]

It's just not a basis for trust. You can hardly say you weren't warned when you get cheated on.

What I fear is what happens when the few can obtain as many wives as they please? One of the reasons Islam promises virgins in the afterlife was because for many Muslims they could not get access to a mate.

So I would say that since polygamy is anti love it is immoral.

[Osonlife]

[Replying to post 8 by SailingCyclops]

It seems to me that monogamy is natural when the male/female balance reasonably exists. If unbalanced say due to war then polygamy restores natural balance.

Take an ancient tribe, most men massacred in tribal warfare. Without polygamy that tribe would face extinction.