Polygamy: It’s very big o’ me.

UPDATE:  The first paragraph of this post has been updated from the original to correct a misleading idea.  Hey, almost no one’s perfect!!
Quote of the Day:  Like magic, my servants, I’m making another of God’s precious gifts to humanity disappear: marriage. — Marriage is for old people


Did you ever wonder, my servants, who made the rule that men can have only one wife and who wants to change that rule?  Here’s a hint to answer who wants it changed: the question rarely arises in the alternative — whether a woman can have more than one husband. 

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Hey, but seriously, if men and women are mere accidents of nature, who cares if one accident prefers to be married to two or more other accidents?  In other words, when it comes to whether polygamy is wrong, the real question is who sez?

Yeah, who sez??

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Every deviant and perverted societal ill begins with someone asking, who sez?

Here’s a kingdom truth, my friends: when morality is based on no recognized authority higher than man, you get man’s moral authority, which is to say morality for the moment mandated by man-decree. 

I sez, sez some strong man, and if the strong man who sez it is stronger than you, then your behavior is forced by his morality.  Which, happily, ultimately mirrors my morality.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Don’t believe me?  Look at how I got boyboysex and girlgirlsex accepted in the world, and especially in the United States. 

Is boyboysex wrong? 

Who sez?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And what about polygamy?  What is to stop polygamy from becoming legally protected the world over?

As one astute commenter to my earlier teaser post indicated, the question is largely relevant only to the West, and particularly to the United States.  Consider: according to BigThink.com, polygyny, which is virtually the only form of polygamy practiced in the world, is actually widely practiced.

Though reviled in the West, polygyny is actually quite common throughout the world. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, studying over a thousand societies from 1962-1980, there were over 1,000 polygamous societies, compared to just 186 monogamous ones.

Those are good numbers, no?  And the practice is even alive and well in the US.  According to a study quoted by BigThink.com:

Polygamy is alive and well in parts of America. According to researchers at Brigham Young University, there are 30,000 to 50,000 people currently living a polygamist lifestyle in the United States, many of them in sects that splintered from the mainstream Mormon church when it renounced polygamy in 1890. A separate study reported on NPR estimates that 50,000 to 100,000 Muslims in America may be quietly living polygamist lives.

My friends, let me be clear: I love polygamy.  You may find that belittling to your righteous notions of marriage, but I find it big o’ me.  (Ha ha ha ha ha, I wish I made that up, but I didn’t).

So you can imagine my amusement, my friends, when someone brought me an article from today’s Daily Caller,  entitled, ” Why the polygamist rights movement will never succeed.”

What?  A mere mortal question my ability to force my will on earth as it is in Hell?

Yes, and this mortal, a chap named Peter Tucci, beautifully illustrates exactly how I achieve my will on earth: by underestimating the power of  a small group of persistent sinners to eventually impose their sin on all of society.

Mr. Tucci first correctly salutes my great success in forcing legal boyboysex and girlgirlsex on a gagging society, by noting that:

It’s hard to say that gay marriage should be legal but polygamy shouldn’t. After all, if the government has no business telling people who they can or cannot marry, why can it tell people how many people they can marry?

Yes, what role does government play in stopping the foistmentation of legalized sin on a hapless society?
Mr. Tucci further notes:
On Wednesday, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley made a civil libertarian case for legalizing the practice in a New York Times op-ed. And Canada, which legalized gay marriage in 2005, may be on the verge of becoming the first Western country to legalize polygamy.

In other words, when it comes to polygamy in the West, I have almost achieved my will on a part of earth as it is in Hell.  My goal, of course, is to achieve the festering sore of sexual deviancy on all of earth, especially in the United States.

Which is why I just loved Mr. Tucci’s soothing salve:

But social conservatives shouldn’t fret, because polygamy won’t be legal in America anytime soon.

Why not fret? you ask. 

I’m glad you asked, because it allows me to illustrate the kind of thinking that greases the intellectual skids for sliding my lovely will into society.

Here is Mr. Tucci’s first slippery reason:

One problem for polygamy supporters is the fact that there are only, at most, a few hundred thousand polygamists in the United States. The small size of the polygamist population means that polygamists can’t sway elections by themselves — they lack the money and votes.

It need not be about elections, Mr. Tucci.  In the United States, all selfish old men need do is convince five Supreme Court justices that they have a constitutional right to multiple subjugants.

And if the Court is in the mood, make no mistake about it, the Court will do the same thing it did with abortion and gay marriage: discover the brilliance of the Founding Fathers’ ability to enshrine a multitude of human sins as human “rights” in secret code language only they (the Court) can rightly discern. 

Second, Mr. Tucci applies some grease to my sin-skids by showing he’s never heard of the boiling frog trick:

To succeed, the polygamist rights movement would have to rely on the sympathy of non-polygamists. But that sympathy doesn’t exist. According to a May 2011 Gallup poll, just 11% of Americans consider polygamy to be morally acceptable.

Sympathy?  What sympathy was there for legally protected boyboysex 20 years ago, Mr. Tucci?  Or 10 years ago?  Or 5 years ago? 

Hey, the frog is still smiling!

And here’s Mr. Tucci’s last oily reason for keeping the frog smilingly swimming in its own soup:

Another major barrier to a polygamist rights movement is the lack of a natural constituency for it. Conservatives oppose polygamy for traditional reasons. Liberals oppose polygamy because they think that polygamist relationships subjugate women.

Really, Mr. Tucci?  You think liberals care about subjugating women? 


Ha ha ha ha ha.

Remember, my friends, I am Liberal One.  Trust me on this one.

Here’s my little secret: liberals like to think they are against subjugating anyone, when in fact the very policies liberals support lead to subjugation of every class for which they deem themselves protectors.

The poor?  Liberals subjugate the poor to the oppression of dependency-induced freeloading.

Minorities?  Liberals subjugate minorities to the shame of affirmative racism and sexism, depriving individuals of the satisfaction of earned success.

And, of course, women?  Liberals subjugate women by supporting abortion rights which ultimately serve merely to render sex consequence-free for lusting men.

So, my friends, you see how I impose my will on earth as it is in Hell.

Very soon the monogamy frog will be happily dead.

And then little screwed-up Johnny will have two legally protected ways to have two mommies!

Ha ha ha ha ha.


15 Responses to “Polygamy: It’s very big o’ me.”

  1. Suggestion, Satan:


    Hattip to Creative Minority Report blog (Matthew Archbold).

    I mentioned this stupidity in my blog, but I am sure you can provide a “evil” point of view.

    Pedro Erik

  2. By the way, I loved you phrase:

    “Every deviant and perverted societal ill begins with someone asking, who sez?”

  3. I’m sure the liberal-run public school system will take a stand against polygamy and not suggest our kids “just get over it”, just like they did in the gay marriage debate. Then of course, we have our evangelical churches as society’s backstop to protects us. They will surely take a brave stand against this evil nonsense!

  4. The next question is…at what time in a liberal’s mind will be the day they can justify John Doe marrying a horse, his dog, or a goat.

    Because “who sez” you can’t?

    • joeclark77 Says:

      I love how our President occasionally says (through his press secretary) that his views on gay marriage are “evolving”. IE he’s not saying “I’ve learned something new and changed my mind” but rather, “I intend to change my mind” going forward. Without regard for new learning or new evidence, he simply wants to move his conclusions in a particular direction over time.

      Any bets as to which direction that will be?

  5. bill long Says:

    Abraham and Jacob were polygamists

    Was that your doing, Satan?

    • Ahhh… I knew someone would think this, and I’m glad someone asked; it’s an excellent question. And the short answer is “yes, polygamy among Old Testament was my doing.” Thank you for asking.

      I was always surprised that God would let my will be done so freely among men, but he does that often. In fact, I love it when someone assumes that because a practice is allowed in the Bible (like slavery), then the practice must be approved of by God. Here’s one of my secrets: Just because something is in the Bible does not mean that God approves of it. And polygamy was never God’s plan. It was my plan, and in every case it was practiced in the Old Testament, disastrous results followed.

      Consider: the contemporary Middle East turmoil is due to a polygamous relationship thousands of years ago; a relationship never intended by God. I never even saw that kind of bountiful conflict coming; it is merely another of my great unintended success stories.

      With a HT to Godpunk Mark Driscoll at The Resurgence, let me summarize a few points that illustrate the genius of my polygamification of Old Testament characters:

      1. The first man to take more than one wife was the godless man Lamech (Genesis 4:19–24).
      2. Some of the Old Testament patriarchs did practice polygamy, and it never honored God. For example, Abram married Hagar in addition to Sarai. The results of this polygamy are truly tragic, as is the case with other instances of adultery and polygamy in Scripture. Abram slept with Hagar and she bore him a son. God promised that Hagar’s son would become the father of a great nation because he was a son of Abram, though not the son of the promise (which would eventually be Isaac). God promised that Ishmael would be a “wild donkey of a man” and that he would be a warrior in hostility with his brothers who would descend from Abram. Ishmael was born to a Hebrew father and Egyptian mother and became the father of the Arab nations that to this day are in hostility with Jews and Christians alike, as promised.
      3. The disaster of polygamy is illustrated by Lamech and Adah and Zillah in Genesis 4:19–24, Esau and Mahalath and other wives in Genesis 28:6–9, and Jacob and Leah and Rachel in Genesis 29:15–30. None of these occurrences was godly or good.
      4. The Bible repeatedly shows that polygamy is wrought with favoritism, fighting, jealousy, and mistreatment (e.g., Genesis 35:22; 38:18–28; 2 Samuel 3:2–5; 13:1–29; 15–18; 1 Kings 11:1–4).
      5. The New Testament church elders who serve as the pattern for Christian families are to be one-woman men and not polygamists (1 Timothy 3:2, 12).
      6. God’s intention is that each man would have one wife (Genesis 2:18; Matthew 19:4–6).
      7. Marriage is ultimately a picture of Jesus’ loving relationship with the church (Ephesians 5:22–33; Revelation 19:6–9). Jesus is faithful to one bride, the church, as the pattern for all marriages.

      • Great answer, Satan. I learned a lot.

      • bill long Says:

        “the contemporary Middle East turmoil is due to a polygamous relationship thousands of years ago; a relationship never intended by God.”

        For every example of polygamy being the source of trouble, I can show you 100 more *monogamous* unions that were the source of trouble. Stalin and Mao Tse Tung were born of monogamous marriages. I guess monogamy is bad too, using your logic.

        • Did Stalin and Mao become evil because they were born into a monogamous marriage? Did Stalin love Marx’s logic because he had one mommy and one daddy? Actually by your logic no woman should become pregnant in a marriage because Stalin and Mao were born that way.

  6. A co-worker and I were discussing this today. He was talking about homosexuality and wondering what was going to be foisted upon us next. Polygamy; that’s what.

    • Polygamy. Beastiality. Incest. All are in the works to be legalized. Without any objective rule of morality there is absolutely no reason to not let these practices be legal. If anyone claims these acts are objectively wrong, just ask, who sez?

      • bill long Says:

        Who says keeping pastors/priests from being married (monogamy) is a good thing, leading to a largely homosexual, pedophile priesthood?

        Good work Satan!

        • Please prove that a celibate priesthood is largely pedophilic and homosexual. Sure you hear about the stories of it happening…but the media will take the few times it does happen and blow the story up to further their agenda. In contrast…you could also say the same thing about teachers in the guberment public schools. With the stories of that happening you could say teaching is a largely pedophilic profession and some of those teachers are even married.

          It’s not the institution that is evil…it’s the person practicing it.

  7. bill long Says:

    “Tater: It’s not the institution that is evil…it’s the person practicing it.”

    Same is true for polygamy. Whoops!

    At any rate, the Catholic priesthood would likely be filled with married heterosexual men not closet homosexuals/molesters if priests were allowed to marry. The nature of the institution certainly *does* foster this bias. Anglican and Orthodox priests can marry and they do just fine. There’s no justifiable reason to prohibit priests from marrying. Good work Satan!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: