[Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?

Art Deco art.deco.studios at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 08:46:49 PST 2013


The issue is free choice by consenting adults who presumably can decide and
control their own destinies as well as those who choose man/woman
monogamy.  Admittedly, some do not this very well, but if two can make
mistakes, why deny it to three,..?

w


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Donovan Arnold <
donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I don't think it is feasible the way you are suggesting, Paul. Think
> about all the legal, medical, financial, and custody issues and
> complexities that would be involved with that situation. Lets not forget
> the level of abuse a spouse might endure as well if they want to break off,
> or the group wants to break them off. These issues are extreme with just
> two people, image how it would be in a multifaceted relationship?
>
> Donovan J. Arnold
>
>   *From:* Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> *To:* "Gier, Nicholas" <ngier at uidaho.edu>; Art Deco <
> art.deco.studios at gmail.com>; "vision2020 at moscow.com" <
> vision2020 at moscow.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:18 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
>
>  This is the problem when trying to discuss polygamy on this list.
> People assume you are talking about men "taking wives", and not n number of
> spouses (of any combination of genders) each agreeing to marry into the
> group, whatever their reasons.  The average American may not be able to
> "support multiple wives", but a group of three or more average Americans
> combining their finances as part of a marriage of equals might be better
> off them all of them tackling it on their own.
>
> If you take the history of polygamy out of the discussion, which pretty
> much means removing much of the religious baggage associated with it, it
> doesn't seem any stranger to me to have three people involved in a marriage
> as opposed to two.
>
> Besides, I'm just coming at it from the side of "these n people want to
> marry, why should I try to stop them?"
>
> Paul
>
>
>   *From:* "Gier, Nicholas" <ngier at uidaho.edu>
> *To:* Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>; vision2020 at moscow.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 5, 2013 9:28 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
>
>  Good Morning Visionaries:
>
> The late king of Bhutan, Harvard educated and wildly loved by his people,
> was married to four sisters.  He of course did not recommend that
> arrangement for his people.  A monarchy can afford to support multiple
> wives, but a happy peasant making only on average $1,500 per year cannot.
> And neither can an average American.
>
> The new king of Bhutan has only one wife.  The young king of Morocco has
> also pledged that he will take only one.  There may a trend developing
> here, even in countries that have tolerated polygamy.
>
> Now back to my chapter entitled "Buddhist Violence in Bhutan: From
> Incarnated Lamas (one very violent) to Hereditary Kings (all peaceful)."
> Even the current Dalai Lama believes that Tibet would have been better to
> switch to a monarchy in the 17th Century.
>
> The intrigues surrounding the choosing of young boys for rule (there were
> many battles over contending candidates) and making secret the deaths of
> high lamas (56 years in the case of Bhutan!)made for political chaos and
> violence, some of it committed by armed monks or the Tibetan equivalent of
> Voodoo.  Bhutan's Red Hat Shabdrung is credited with defeating (at least
> 9 times) the Yellow Hat armies of Tibet by the use of Tantric magic.  The
> monks would spend days making paper effigies of Tibetan horses and
> soldiers, and sure enough thousands of them died of disease and storms.
>
> Yours for loving couples only,
>
> Nick
>
> A society grows great when old men plant the seeds of trees whose shade
> they know they shall never sit in.
>
> -Greek proverb
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com on behalf of Art Deco
> Sent: Tue 3/5/2013 3:58 AM
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
>
> @Donovan,
>
> What you say is true for some polygamy practices such as the fundamentalist
> Mormon sects (some in Boundary County, Idaho and just across the border in
> Lister and Creston, B.C).  The women are *not consenting adults* often
> married off in their early or mid teens.
>
> However, not all polygamous or polyandrous relationships are like that as a
> little Googling will show you.
>
> Most arguments advocating polygamy/polyandry advocate it only for
> consenting adults.  Those arguments are based on freedom of choice to
> determine one's lifestyle and on the benefits of polygamy/polyandry (which
> like monogamous marriage between a man and a woman are not always realized
> or fully realized).
>
>
> The probable success of any polygamous/polyandrous marriage depends on a
> lot of factors some of them cultural.
>
> Please Google the subject to examine your assumptions.
>
> w.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Donovan Arnold <
> donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > wrote:
>
> > The fundamental problem with the slippery slope polygamy argument is
> > polygamy moves socially in the opposite direction of same sex marriage.
> > Gay marriage is about expanding the rights of men and women to make a
> > choice for themselves. Polygamy is about oppression of women as
> > property of men. To allow gay marriage and polygamy at the same time
> > would be impossible from a legal and bureaucratic perspective of groups
> > of people all married to each other in endless combinations with
> children.
> > Tax breaks, child and property custody, medical and insurance benefits,
> > and US census would be fraught with contradictions, endless definitions,
> > legal battles, and errors.  Polygamy was only used to avoid adulteryand/or
> to provide widows with a man's care and protection when they were
> > scarce because of war and their acts of stupidity.
> >
> >   *From:* Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>
> > *To:* Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
> > *Cc:* "<vision2020 at moscow.com>" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > *Sent:* Monday, March 4, 2013 8:58 AM
> >
> > *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
> >
> >  Really? Judging by the subject header, the punctuation, the caps and the
> > lead off post, the discussion is that no argument in favor of homosexual
> > marriage would not work just as well for a polygamous marriage and the
> > outrage wrought by such a simple statement of fact. Perhaps you should
> > review the posts leading up to this one. (most especially your own)
> >
> > By the way, thanks for the reading recommendation. You can't go wrong
> with
> > the classics.
> >
> > g
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> >
> >   Mr. Crabtree -
> >
> > I am not attempting to discredit polygamy (although I do not support it).
> >  That is NOT what this discussion is about.  I am simply (and for the
> > umpteenth and final time) expressing my opinion that same-sex marriages
> > should be acknowledged as legitimate and constitutionally sound as
> > guaranteed by the 14th amendment.
> >
> > Don't wait for the movie.  Read the text . . .
> > http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
> >
> > Another thing . . .
> >
> > I am not assuming any moral authority.
> >
> > I am simply expressing my opinion.
> >
> > It seems rather peculiar, yet is becoming quite common, that if I (or Joe
> > Campbell or Wayne Fox or . . . ) express our substantiated opinions we
> are
> > accused of wrongfully assuming moral authority.
> >
> > 'Nuff said!!!!
> >
> > Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.moscowcares.com/
> >
> >  Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> > On Mar 3, 2013, at 8:49 AM, Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >  What you conveniently leave out is the why. If to deny any two an
> > "experience" is lacking in the slightest inkling of human compassion why
> > not three or more? If you are asking me to accept your statement based on
> > your irrefutable moral authority you are asking far too much.
> >
> > g
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Perhaps you missed it in my post, Mr. Crabtree.
> >
> > So, here it is *AGAIN*.
> >
> > "To deny ANY *TWO* [emphasis added] individuals of such an experience,
> > merely because it runs contra to somebody else's belief system, lacks
> the
> > slightest inkling of human compassion."
> >
> > http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2013-March/089517.html
> >
> > Two:  More than one and less than three.
> >
> > Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.moscowcares.com/
> >
> >  Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mar 3, 2013, at 6:29 AM, "Gary Crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >  I'm not sure what else I can take away. I have heard that the topic is
> > "complex" and that you don't wish to "confuse the issue." What I have not
> > heard is the slice of logic that would refute the statement that so
> > outraged Mr. Hansen and kicked off this thread. Perhaps I wasn't paying
> > proper attention. Please state for me clearly and without obfuscation the
> > argument in favor of homosexual marriage the can not be applied equally
> to
> > polygamous unions. An analogy as to why homosexual marriage doesn't
> > necessarily lead to polygamy is not at all the same thing. It seems to me
> > that without anyone being able to provide the example that differentiates
> > between the two, Wilson's "fallacious claim" stands without refute.
> >
> > g
> >
> >  *From:* Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> > *Sent:* Saturday, March 02, 2013 6:12 PM
> > *To:* Gary Crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com>
> > *Cc:* Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> ; Paul Rumelhart<
> godshatter at yahoo.com>;
> > vision2020 at moscow.com
> > *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
> >
> > It pains me that I take my time to carefully spell out why I don't think
> > these are the same at all, legally etc., but your takeaway, Gary, is
> that I
> > add support to Wilson's fallacious claim.
> >
> > An analogy similar to one I used before: Saying that legalization of gay
> > marriage will lead to legalization of polygamy is like saying that sex
> with
> > your wife will lead to an orgy. I see no reason for thinking the one than
> > for thinking the other. After all, if you've got reasons for sex with one
> > person WHY NOT sex with many? Just the same reason over again, right? But
> > even you can see the line here, Gary, even though these issues are vague.
> > And so can members of the Supreme Court when it comes to differentiating
> > between gay marriage and polygamy.
> >
> > This says nothing about my views on polygamy, and for a number of reasons
> > I don't think it is helpful to talk about polygamy while we're working on
> > gay marriage -- for one thing, though bad, slippery-slope arguments
> happen
> > to be persuasive. My point is I COULD hold that gay marriage is OK and
> > polygamy is not and not be guilty of an inconsistency because of it. This
> > is a refutation of the Wilson claim.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Gary Crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > **
> >  "I argued at length that *all* the arguments employed to advance same
> > sex marriage can be, are being, and will be used to advance polygamy
> also.
> > In short, gay marriage greases the skids for polygamy."
> >
> > If nothing else this thread has certainly proven Doug to be spot on in
> > his analysis. Goodness knows that's gotta sting.
> >
> > g
> >
> >  *From:* Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> > *Sent:* Friday, March 01, 2013 6:06 PM
> > *To:* Gary Crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com>
> > *Cc:* Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> ; Paul Rumelhart<
> godshatter at yahoo.com>;
> > vision2020 at moscow.com
> >  *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
> >
> > I'm not denying anything. Maybe three or more. I just don't want to
> > confuse it with the issue of same-sex marriage. That seems important to
> me,
> > just because I can see the folks that such a law might help. I don't
> happen
> > to meet many polygamists, so I'm not too concerned for now.
> >
> > Why not take one step: include same-sex marriages. If the polygamists
> > complain as much as the gays and lesbians, we might have to revisit the
> > issue.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Gary Crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > **
> > Then why deny three or more?
> >
> > g
> >
> >  *From:* Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
> > *Sent:* Friday, March 01, 2013 2:07 PM
> > *To:* Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> > *Cc:* vision2020 at moscow.com
> >  *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
> >
> > I absolutely fail to see what the happiness of two adults has ANYTHING to
> > do with a polygamous relationship.
> >
> > Let me simply say . . .
> >
> > Later this year, I turn 62, my spouse turns whatever age she acquires,
> and
> > we (my spouse and I) turn 40; forty of the most wonderfully memorable and
> > loving years of yesterdays that will only be improved upon with
> tomorrows.
> >
> > To deny ANY two individuals of such an experience, merely because it runs
> > contra to somebody else's belief system, lacks the slightest inkling of
> > human compassion.
> >
> > Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.moscowcares.com/
> >
> >  Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> > On Mar 1, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >  I think the general argument would run something like this:  "if it's OK
> > for any two consenting adults of either gender to marry, then why isn't
> it
> > OK for any three or more consenting adults of any gender to marry?"
> >
> > If that's what he's thinking, I can kind of see his point.  Of course,
> I'm
> > personally fine with gay marriage, and would have no problems with
> polygamy
> > either.  I'd be happiest if the government got out of the marriage racket
> > to begin with, frankly.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >   *From:* Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> > *To:* Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>
> > *Cc:* vision2020 at moscow.com
> > *Sent:* Friday, March 1, 2013 11:39 AM
> > *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Huh? Say WHAT!?
> >
> > Well, if he argued that polygamy and gay marriage are similar, then that
> > is just another fallacious argument. It is like arguing that we can give
> > every adult the right to vote because that would lead to some folks
> voting
> > more than once. We would be powerless to avoid that!
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >  Cultmaster Wilson is hopelessly floundering as he is swept out to sea
> on
> > the tide of reality and oncoming change.  But that's what happens to
> those
> > that allege total faith in some "inerrant" ancient texts.  Foolhardiness
> > begets misery for others.
> >
> > It's too bad that the Cultmaster is not a Mormon so that he could have a
> > "new" vision from some alleged God correcting his current views.
> >
> > w.
> >
> >
> >  On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> >
> >   "I argued at length that *all* the arguments employed to advance same
> > sex marriage can be, are being, and will be used to advance polygamy
> also.
> > In short, gay marriage greases the skids for polygamy."
> >
> > - Doug Wilson (March 1, 2013)
> > http://www.dougwils.com/Sex-and-Culture/a-century-of-sinkholes.html
> >
> > Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.moscowcares.com/
> >
> >  Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
> > art.deco.studios at gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >  =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net/
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com> <
> Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >  =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> > =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net/
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > =======================================================
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
> art.deco.studios at gmail.com
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net/
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net/
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130307/0248edd2/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Vision2020 mailing list