Real QOD

Filed in National by on June 17, 2008

If there are more women than men on the planet why are men only allowed to have one wife in the United States?  If a woman doesn’t mind sharing a man, should the state regulate the number of wives or husbands someone can have?

About the Author ()

hiding in the open

Comments (20)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. jason330 says:
    June 17, 2008 at 7:48 am

    I think it the status quo is really regulated by the very long trial and error experiment called 10 million years of human biological and social evolution.

    One to one marriage is more more likley to result in stable social groups that can get things done.

  2. Brian says:
    June 17, 2008 at 8:27 am

    Jason not necessarily. Polygamy, Polyandry, Monogamy and other forms of social relationship have all been common. Monogamy usually can help keep the birth rate down when compared with the extended family system. We still have not decided which is best, one only need look at the diversity of laws in Utah….to see that the issue still is not settled….I for one know I only want one woman the one who for me is the best in the world….but I am not going to tell my neighbors what to do.

  3. Dana says:
    June 17, 2008 at 8:42 am

    I’ve had my sister-in-law living with us for the past eight years. She had been married for 22 years prior to that, and has no idea how treat a man other than as a husband. In effect, I have two wives, even though I only get to sleep with one of them. And I can tell you one thing: any man who wants more than one wife is f***ing crazy! He should be hauled away by the men in white coats!

  4. Nancy Willing says:
    June 17, 2008 at 8:51 am

    Dana, you are a saint or you must love your wife more than life itself.

  5. anon says:
    June 17, 2008 at 9:33 am

    Can’t remember where I read this theory… but in a society with high inequality between rich and poor, it is more advantageous for a woman (and her children) to share a rich man than to have a poor man all to themselves. Maybe that is why we are hearing more about polygamy these days.

  6. Brian says:
    June 17, 2008 at 10:56 am

    Dear anon,

    I think that was the theory put forth by the renowned Dr. Strangelove.

  7. jason330 says:
    June 17, 2008 at 11:04 am

    I have a question of the day. How much money do you have to make to owe Delaware a wire x-fer of $63 million?

    I just read that NJ story – holy smokes!

  8. Dominique says:
    June 17, 2008 at 11:44 am

    I’m not sure why any man would want or need more than one wife. Do you guys really want to hear “take out the trash” in stereo (or 5-speaker surround)?

  9. Pandora says:
    June 17, 2008 at 3:22 pm

    I adore Big Love. What does that say about me?

  10. G Rex says:
    June 17, 2008 at 4:19 pm

    What, exactly, is wrong with polygamy? It’s not for me ( see Dominique’s above comment) but if you’re okay with gays getting “married” then what’s the big deal?

    My guess is that it’s just a socially-accepted excuse to be anti-Mormon.

  11. Brian says:
    June 17, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    G-Rex polygamy, polyandry, monogamy, it really is not important. The important point for me is not to bother my neighbors. They can do what they want, as long as they do not try to force me to do what they do- I am not worried about their form of union. lol….

    Pandora, how do you define Big Love? lol….

  12. Pandora says:
    June 17, 2008 at 4:42 pm

    Brian, have you seen the show on HBO? The husband is on Viagra.

    First, I have to be wife #1. Then I get to tell the other wives what to do: Go do the grocery shopping, make the kids’ Halloween costumes, cook dinner. You get the picture. Division of labor!!

    In my twenties I would have been outraged, now… not so much!

  13. Dana Garrett says:
    June 17, 2008 at 5:15 pm

    See how it is w/ liberals. First they want to free slaves, then let women to vote and now they think the state ought to butt out of the kinds of relationships people w/ one another.

    What’s next? Gay marriage?

  14. Dana says:
    June 17, 2008 at 6:45 pm

    Nancy: the sister-in-law wasn’t supposed to be here this long!

  15. Dana says:
    June 17, 2008 at 6:46 pm

    Mr Garrett: The founding fathers had it right when they restricted the franchise to white male property owners.

  16. Dominique says:
    June 17, 2008 at 8:38 pm

    I have a question about polygamists – What do these guys do for a living that allows them to support so many wives and children? Also, where does everybody park their cars? Do they get fleet insurance? I wouldn’t want to live next door to polygamists. All those cars would bug me. It’s just plain tacky.

  17. G Rex says:
    June 18, 2008 at 11:39 am

    Brian, I’ve never seen Big Love, but I think it’s the same idea as Raise the Red Lantern, but without the foot massages. Love me some Gong Li!

  18. Joanne Christian says:
    June 18, 2008 at 1:42 pm

    Brian–I can assure you there is no “diversity of laws” in Utah in regards to polygamy, plural marriage etc. The law of the land is monogamy, and that is enforced–those who practice otherwise, have no legal recognition nor paperwork to validate such a claim. The “polygamist” colonies could be compared to a “kibbutz”, or a “commune”. but the added feature of “marriage or sex” adds that tinttallating(sp) aspect that “people” just salivate
    over to hear more!! It is an interesting sub-culture to say the least–but they are on their own–neither endorsed, acknowledged, allowed, or LEGAL by the state of Utah, or the Mormon church headquartered in Utah. Like a female wanting/claiming to be a priest in the Catholic church–a polygamist would meet the same fate in the Mormon church—excommunication. Just an FYI to all “who seek understanding”–tee hee–have a great Big Love Day!!!

  19. jason330 says:
    June 18, 2008 at 2:26 pm

    Thanks for that correction Joanne. Always a pleasure to hear from one of our favorite Republicans.

  20. RSmitty says:
    June 18, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    Hey! Stop coddling up to another one, J! That’s MY title! Darn it!!!

«
»