Nobody responded to this despite the choice wording [ex. “comedy stylings”] and surly account offered by Shope. Good stuff.
For me polygamy is the natural essence of human sexuality. You can observe it with other primates in the wild.
Monogamy is sexuality taken to ideal because of it’s inherent idealization.
I agree with you that monogamy as a ideal is one of complete hardship with a certain difficulty to maintain because of it’s artificial maintaining.
I don’t know if I would call monogamy entirely a religious concept especially with some species exhibiting it in the wild but I can certainly see it’s origins in religion for human beings. Overtime it has become heavily socialized however.
Liberalism has kinda made monogamy impotent which is why we are seeing a more polygamous nontraditional western civilization today.
I pretty much agree with the rest of the post you have stated. Just so you know as a observer I’ve come to admire a lot of your posts here at the forum.
Keep the posts coming. 
I would think it’s Polyamory, because many mammals and insects, for example, do not cohabitate after sexual reproduction. Or they may not cohabitate for a long time, let alone a full lifetime. In fact, in many insect species, males can even get their heads bitten off (patricide, praying mantice). “-gamy” is more about cohabitation, and living together. Humans seem like a specie most abundant with Gamy. However, I would guess “-amory” (love/sex) is still the norm. Rather, I’d guess, since I don’t know the exact numbers, that Humans have the most consistent and highly dense cases and examples of Monogamy, and Polygamy, but that polyamory still rules the norm in humanity, and in the majority of other species out there.
Because having sex with another, and then just going off to have sex with another and another, is the natural male desire. And that isn’t very “problematic” in evolutionary terms. It is a very successful strategy. It isn’t until an organism becomes more “evolved” that polygamy and monogamy occurs. I’d say that polygamy and monogamy occurs due to more complex adaptation methods of groups against earthly environments. Because groups form through cohabitation. So monogamy and polygamy are the natural route toward societies, of any kind.
For example, when humans began to confront tundra conditions, and icy terrain, a group became more essential to their survival, and so Polygamy and Monogamy would become functions of this cohabitation. Free sex within a group tends to lead to conflict and violence, through jealousy. I’d expect that internal group conflict to be a big problem, and expected.
It’s very simple to reason. The Promises required by traditional, conservative values of Christianity (Roman Catholicism) is “Unto Death do us part, Husband and Wife become One.” So Monogamy actually facilitates jealousy and hostility to outsiders. In essence, this preserves the core of the family unit, between Man and Woman, as these two are the ones who can and will beget further children into any type of community, group, or social structure.
These promises are difficult to live up to. That’s why they’re promises. And that’s why they’re important. They’re Values and Virtues. And they’re difficult to realize, because the realization requires a full lifetime. If you become married, as a Husband, and somebody tries to fuck your wife, or does, then of course you’d want revenge. And murder can even become justifiable in these types of cases. Is the Wife at fault? Is the strange man at fault? This is where the Church steps in, or, the outer community, to help the Husband. This is where the sense of “Justice” arose in early human societies. Because the community itself is obliged to protect the essence of marriage, just as Husband and Wife are obliged to pay homage to their Church, Conservative values, and Tradition.
This is why Catholic “Mass” is important. “God” protects Marriage. And in return, those of the Church, who ordained these marriages return to “Appease Him”. This conception of a spiritual “absolute male authority” is also the essence of Justice. So “He” will help you, in discovering the cause of the problem, of your wife’s disloyalty. Was the wife being a whore, as it is sometimes in the nature of women, or was the strange man intruding through his volition? Who is at fault? The Church intervenes, and helps the Husband. So the Church (community) and Husband work together to rectify the “Wrong/Sin”.
The strange man is first in the wrong. But the wife must become investigated too…was she raped? The investigation begins. And the Church doles out punishments, in place of, or in league with, the Husband. Because both he, the Husband, and the Church, the community, enact Justice in the form of revenge. It maybe legitimate for the Husband to kill the strange Man and/or to rebuke the wife for tempting strange men. Either way, all forms of Justice exist to reassure the original Marriage Vow. The Church wants the Marriage to succeed. So it has a vested interest. And the Husband wants revenge. So he has a vested interest. Therefore, both can work toward a mutual end.
In fact, almost every form of social and state law, today, arise from religious traditions, mostly Christian in the United States.
In this thread, or another thread, I referred to “Natural Monogamy”. You maybe correct. However, if two organisms can have sex with each other, and each other only, and cohabitate for a lifetime, then this would constitute a Natural Monogamy. It seems very likely to me that religion, morality, and culture arises from Natural Morality rather than the other way around, and that people become monogamous through religious organizations.
You cannot force a ‘nature’ into people who do not have it already. Rather, those who are Naturally Monogamous, exist as a public ideal, toward what others idealize, and look up to, in order to live a “better life”. But Monogamy does produce some very critical benefits which are nonexistent in other relationships.
The core difference is…Trust. If a Man and Woman can trust each-other forever, then isn’t that worth knowing, experiencing, and feeling? Wouldn’t it be so great to know the woman you love, that she loves you the same, and that you’d both die to protect one-another?
So yes, of course, this is an Idealism. But that is also why it is “Good” and holy. Idealism merely is a type of wanting. In this case, of wanting trust.
I believe all people, all humans, all organisms even, want that type of Trust. It is a competition between Selfish and Selfless desire, the desire of One or Two, monism or dualism. Is Man and Wife one indivisible unit? Or can people divide love apart, cause betrayals, and all sorts of revenge? Higher ideals of love idealize, and also realize, higher forms of human relationships.
The “Bonnie and Clyde” and “Natural Born Killers” are great examples of how a Man and Woman can become tied together in love, despite being “criminal”.
I believe religious concepts exist to facilitate these types of relationships. Because if they don’t, then religion truly is useless. But I don’t believe that is the case, as my words ought to display.
Indeed, you are wise Mister Walker. Or shall I call you Joker?
Thank you, Mister Walker. I also respect you a great deal, as I’ve come to know your posts for sometime now.
I plan to write another piece about Monogamy, and the State. Stay tuned. I may have another piece by tonight or tomorrow, if I can remember it.
A Special Dedication to Mister Walker,
The Arguments:
Monogamy, Polygamy, and Polyamory are all “Natural” sexual occurrences in “Nature”. This simply means that some organisms sexually reproduce with between one or many other mates. Those which sexually reproduce and also “Cohabitate” are the “Gamists” representing “-gamy”. That is all it means, Cohabitation. So one can both posit that Monogamy-itself is either natural or artificial. Both of these possibilities are, well, possible. And people need not claim that Monogamy is “natural” or “artificial” for my following case to make common sense. It can become either, natural or artificial, and still maintain logical consistency.
However, according to popularity, most people believe that phenomena grounded in nature is true (Naturalistic Fallacy). Therefore, to appeal to popularity, I will posit that a Natural Monogamy either can, or does, exist. This will subsequently remove the fallacy, because of how Artificiality follows from the premise, that Monogamy can be (and is) grounded “in nature”.
Natural Monogamy:
All Natural Monogamy means, is, a male and female “mate for life”, have children together, and cohabit some type of dwelling or proximate environment. If either one of this pair has sex elsewhere, with a different mate, then he/she actually is not Monogamous. If they are homosexuals with adopted children, then they are not Monogamous. Monogamy only applies to engendered pairs, who have biological sex, and reproduce biological children. Therefore, two humans can “Marry”, but if they never have children, then they technically are still not Monogamous. Because successful sexual copulation is implied through Monogamy.
Children are the point and Purpose of monogamy, as well as polygamy, or any other sexual type of relationship, as well as polyamory.
Artificial Monogamy:
After accepting that it is true, that a man and woman, can meet, have sex with each other, produce children, and cohabitate with their children for life, demonstrates the absolute truth of Natural Monogamy. It does exist in nature, albeit rare. And it exists in animals outside humans too. Therefore monogamy already exists. There need not become anything artificial about it.
However, one day, a very, very, very, very, very long time ago, human tribes noticed something interesting about Monogamous pairs, opposed to Polygamous and Polyamorous mates. Monogamy may have had evolutionary advantages, in terms of a collective group, society, or tribe. In other words, monogamy has some sexual advantages, while polygamy and polyamory also have other sexual advantages.
Now an ancient wise man (my relative obviously) noticed that a Man and Woman bound together by “Monogamy” (as a natural occurrence and predilection) was more beneficial to society than other types of sexual relationships. This is because Monogamy is the most “efficient” type of copulation and pairing, in terms of Society and Civilization. Therefore, if you value society, groups, collections, and civilization, then you probably will value monogamy over polygamy and polyamory. If you value Individuality and Barbarianism, then you probably will value polyamory over monogamy. In fact, if you’re an anti-elitist, uncouth, dirty, disgusting brute, then you probably despise the very notion of Monogamy. It simply won’t make sense, to a barbarian mind.
“Why would anyone want just one mate?!?!?” thinks the Barbarian. The reasons and causes are beyond him, as is the inner-workings of Human Civilization.
Now my ancestor figured all of this out, like, 5000 years ago, let’s say. And so what he did, was begin to build a religion, culture, and tradition around ‘Monogamy’. He understood, that, if you reward people who are (naturally) monogamous, and discourage others who are (naturally) polyamorous, that a “Better society” and “Civilization” could form. Because sexual competition could become reduced within the tribe, and then subsequently redirected toward other means, goals, and ends. He was a real genius, my grand-grand-grand-g-g-g-gggggggggggggggggggggg^10father. He must have been very perceptive, about morality.
Trust:
Everybody values Trust. I don’t care who you are, or whether you’re even human, you value Trust. You value that a person you care about, and/or love, will not betray you. You trust your family. You trust yourself. You trust your senses (unless you’re an absolute suicidal nihilist or self-hater). You trust things. You trust that you can read my words with a common sense. You trust that I mean what I say. You trust that I’m not “fooling” you, or lying to you. You trust what people say, and gauge this trust how people act too. But trust has relative values. And the more powerful a man or woman becomes, the more others place trust into him/her, while conversely, the powerful person must place much less trust in others. Because people want power.
And the closer one gets to God, the closer one may feel the notion to plunge a dagger into His backside, like that fucking traitor Marcus Junius Brutus, or Judas Iscariot!!!
Ehem, nevermind what I just said. Where was I? Oh yes!
I was explaining to you how everybody values trust. And this is never more important, than it is between Man and Wife. Because when a Man and Wife love one-another, and will die for each other, then this is “Good”. This is The Good. This is the epitome of human existence, for those monogamous types of the world. Imagine two, a man and woman, desperately in love with each other. Desperate to find each other, desperate to be at each other’s side, always. They cannot do without each other. The kiss, hug, fuck, piss. They do everything together. They simply adore each other. They just fucking sit on a couch, and stare into each other’s eyes for hours. Just because they want to see each other. That’s it. That’s all it is. They become embroiled in The Highest Passion possible in existence itself, and it is a highly and fiercely sexual passion.
Now the amazing thing here, is that in the Naturally Monogamous types, these two won’t even care to look at others. The Man, although he is masculine, and wants to have sex with other women, knows that he ought not to have sex with them, out of loyalty to his wife. He cares about her opinions. He cares about her jealousy. And so too with the woman. She is beautiful and feminine. And many guys approach her, with rape in mind, and want to violate her sexually. And she knows this, because she is smart, but she doesn’t let them. And if they try, then she resists violently and will kill men who try to rape her. Because she has Pride in herself. And she loves her husband. She will die, for Him.
So these two, Naturally Monogamous pair, will just love each other. And everybody will look up to them, for Trust. Others, jealous of their relationship, will want to mimic it, and write it down in sonatas and plays, to pretend that they are that “Royal Pair”. True love, like this Naturally Monogamy, represents “Monarchy” and “Royalty” and “Elitism”. People envy the inherent Trust that this Man and Woman have together. Many will want to “get between them”. Men will pull the Husband away, and demand that he “go out with the boys”. Women will pull the Wife away, and demand that she “go out with the girls”. Men will want to fuck the wife, to rape her. And women will want to fuck the husband, and seduce him.
But the Husband and Wife will prevail in the end. They will remain True, and Good, and Strong, because it is natural for them.
For people who this is Natural, and requires no work, and is not inconsistent to their nature…these people are “Royalty”. At least, this is the justification.
Idealism:
Now, just about everything I told you is not “real”. It’s ideal. Rather, it’s difficult work to build that “Trust” that I’m talking about here. In fact, it obviously takes a lifetime of work and vigilance. And few really are “monogamous”, let alone naturally monogamous. So Marriage, yes, can become claimed as “artificial” and “ideal”, because it is.
Artifice:
The Artifice of religion, culture, tradition, and conservatism all pour out of Natural Monogamy and Royalty. We take the core, a man and woman in deep love, who need to solidify this relationship, and justify it. And the justification of the relationship is important. Because people have sex, and marry, with respect to social relationships and standings.
Now my ancient ancestor, who created pretty much every religion on Earth today, knew, that Justifying marriage is paramount to a community. So when it comes to tribalism, collectivism, communism, or socialism, all of these ideologies are ultimately premised upon a sexual relationship between man and woman. Because communities cannot exist without men and women having sex. And they cannot sustain themselves, as societies, without legitimacy and cohabitation.
In order for people to cohabitate well, Trust must become ensured. And this is where my Gggrandfather came up with the invention of “Religion”. He invented it. He invented it for the purpose of “binding” the entire community together, under a “rule” or “law”. And this Law became realized in the sexual relationship of the “ideal pair”. Because, as I mentioned, any and all grouping depends upon the sexual relationship of a man and woman.
Now there are many reasons why Polygamous and Polyamorous pairs don’t, or almost never, or perhaps never rise to the top of Social Power and Institution. And that reason is, sexual debauchery, in the form of hedonism, decadence, and general immorality. For example, why not the Father of the marriage, between Man and Woman, have sex with his daughters? And why not the Wife, have sex with her sons??
These types of questions, once answered, eventually fill in, piece by piece, the necessity of morality, let alone cultural tradition, social norms, and religion itself.
God is “The Father”, for a reason. And that reason, revolves around Marriage, and Children, and social hierarchy within the family unit itself.
Although Natural Monogamy maybe a possible for a very rare, small group of biological humans. Artificial Monogamy is a result of comparing one’s own “Morality”, or just a sense of one’s own sexuality, toward an “Archetype” or ideal, of sexual power. And this is where the main point, and conclusion exists, because “sex is power” and “power is sex”. Or I’d rather prefer to conclude: power is sexuality. It is potency and virility. It is about success. It is about reproduction, copulation, and procreation.
The Family:
The healthiest family possible, is one in which a solid ‘male’ figure exists (Father) and a solid ‘female’ figure exists (Mother). If children have two homos for parents, then where is the opposite sex? If a boy has two gay fathers, then where is the mother? And if a girl has two lesbian mothers, then where is the father? Or if a family is polygamous, and a daughter has 3 mothers, then which one is “hers” (biologically)? And if a son has 3 fathers, then which one is “his” (biologically)?
Here we can see the Possessive aspect of nature. People want Claim and Ownership over themselves. People expect Responsibility. And the West has thrown this word “responsibility” out the window. All westerners are decadent and wrong. Ownership begins within the family.
And if you have no family, then what do you “own”? Who can you even “trust” without family?
Is the daughter yours? Is the son his? Who is who? Where is where? What is what?
When children are raised by surrogate parents, then they can become confused: “Mommy, where did daddy go?” And parents can feel the need to lie to their children. Because they have messed things up! People are weak. People make dumb decisions in life. People act without thinking. Or two lesbians “thought becoming homos was a good idea at the time”, without realizing that they’d fuck their child’s life up, in the end. They, the two dikes, weren’t “thinking” about the consequences of their lifestyles. Rather, they “just wanted to have fun” and “wanted to fuck” each other. It’s disgraceful.
People don’t care about the consequences, when they’re stupid and decadent. They’re not paying attention. And even if you can force them to pay attention, then they often just don’t give a shit, anyway. “Fuck other people, I only care about myself”. I think that this form of Selfishness is what it all comes down to.
And selfishness destroys Marriage. It is the very thing that dissolves the relationship between Man and Woman, Husband and Wife. That’s why, my relatives a long time ago, had to step in, to control this type of “selfishness”, in order to build a group, to build a tribe, to build a collective, to make a society. To make an artifice. That’s what society and civilization are, have been, and will become. We make things. We Build.
We build Relationships! That, truly, is what morality, religion, culture, tradition, and conservatism is all about. But most people are not into “building”, but rather “tearing down”. These are the Nietzscheans out there.
They see a beautiful Man and Woman together, Husband and Wife, King and Queen. And rather become that themselves, and embody the code, they would rather “get between them”. They would rather infiltrate what is not within them to become. They’d rather steal that Trust, for themselves. A man would see the beauty of the queen, and want to rape her. A woman would see the beauty of the king, and want to seduce him. Others will want to tear this apart.
Because it is Trust built over time, and generations. Many generations. The european traditions, and that blood that still flows today in our hearts, still beats.
It was never wrong. And power is built over generations. Families are created between centuries and millenniums. It’s not one simple fucking lifetime and that’s the end of it.
It’s not one stupid little bitch who gets pregnant in high school, and her “future” is over. Well it is over, in a way, but that’s not what I mean. I mean, a family, a Fucking Family, the real deal that is strong, and cohesive, and lasts forever…
[size=200]IS IMMORTAL!!![/size]
Because it is this “unit”, this “family unit”, that cannot die. And it is this society, that cannot die. Yes, individually, one or two or three may die. Maybe the parents die and all the children but one. Yet this one, a leftover son, or daughter, can rebuild the entire foundation again! That is why family is so important. It is actual immortality. It is comprised of parts, of “moral participants” within it. And any sense of ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ endures within it, within the family.
This is where we all have come from, too long ago to even remember.
Not necessarily easier… it comes with consequences and the necessity for particular behavioral expectations to be met… maintain those requires much more time then what short amount of time would be required to construct a will…
Speaking for myself, I tend make to an effort not to compare myself to man or gods, I hope to promote in myself a sense of truth. Now, what determines the principles of predication is the definition of the self, and there we are never alone as we are one member of a class. Scripture actuallys uses a metaphor, a beast with seven eyes and seven horns. Seven ways to percieve the enviroment , and seven means of protecting our life-- that is if you can understand simple metaphor.
One of the nice things about an inch, one never has to listen to the 1 hundreth, or the one thousanths, or the countless number of them complain that one of them is like or unlike another. Not one of them measures what they are as compared to those other inches in their environment, but they look toward the definition of an inch itself, by that alone they know if they are an inch or not. And so, I feel the same myself. I could care less about comparing my behavior with the behavior of those around me, but towards the definition of behavior that best performs my function.
I do know if we do not understand that we have a very specific function, our behavior in life will never be very remarkable, or purposeful. It does not take a very intelligent person to realize that if they do not understand their function, their purpose, well they really do not need to find anyone else in specific to wander around with. What is annoying though, is the number of aimless people who, for some ungodly reason, just cannot wait to waiste another persons life as well. One might liken human civilzation to the parts of a cow, where most people are that part that one just might not want to step in.
The greater one’s understanding is, the more they understand how lucky they would be, as Socrates said, to find just one friend.
Have you any idea how many wills are in probate courts right now? They are backed up for years. Any relative can contest a will, that puts a halt on any assets. A child, a spouse has first rights to all assets a marriage gives them that right. Toss in that will of yours and all hell can break loose. your kids are screwed.
There are many ways of saying the part is equal to the whole. One of them is when people create children together. Now, how well a person is a crafter of future events determines how they comprehend the act of copulation itself and they will argue their respective points as if there were any real sense in them. However, one cannot run from the fact that the human mind is developing to master human actions through time and that it takes two to have children.
Therefore, it does not matter how rich either progeniter happens to be in terms of physical assets, for a person is, after all, mind, and all they can ever do, in reality, is leave behind the assets of mind. If a person thinks that a child will do better without certain givens, to learn to be their own person. One person can inherit a fortune and simply waste it, another can inherit only the wind and make a kingdom.
The real issue is, and always has been, that people do not respect what belongs to a person, and will go to courts with judges just as corrupt as they are and take what does not belong to them while the greater portion of society sits idly by content with this justice. Geting back to the opening sentence of this paragraph, the human mind is responsible for human action over time. Now in this regard one will notice two distinct types of individuals, one who believes that when a person dies, their word and will dies with them, and that is where we have court congestion, while the other regards a persons word and will to actually have this function in regard to time, regardless as to whether or not the origin of that word is or is not. The one perspective is self referential, while the other is self revealing.
Marriage is convention. Natural inasmuch as it is organic – a natural consequence of our nature. We are political and social animals, but also selfish and prodigal. While I do think marriage was initially a religious institution, jealousy, deceit, and vengeance were not. We want to protect what we are most passionate about and we [humanity] practically bleed reciprocation. We want to know that object of our passion or desire shares the same sentiments toward us [if applicable].
I wouldn’t only call marriage natural, but also prudent. If not for religion, we would have devised a similar social institution. We aren’t the only animals with a tenancy toward monogamy, ya know. And none of them, including us, can be held as completely monogamous. We may just be in the unique position of having exploited this tendency in a way that it profits more than just the respective couple.
I think the enslavement of women by men is probably the true origin of marriage. Men likely abducted women and then kept them, for their usefulness. Kind of like the transformation from hunting and gathering to agriculture - it’s a way to guarantee access to the things you want. Following that, equalizing of the power balance (“the institution of marriage”) was a way of sublimating the baser aspects of the relationship.
They are not backed up… my dad got a will in a few days…
Haha, nice visual aid! I actually considered your idea in much the same way. However, I think what you describe is the origin of ‘possession’ in a relationship. But that would seem to boil down to utility. As such, I’d think a more primal scenario in which men abducted women and kept them wouldn’t result in life-long relationships. What I want now isn’t necessarily what I’ll want tomorrow, let alone 5 years from now. I think religion is really what made a virtue out of maintaining these relationships, as life-long endeavors. I do think you are onto something with the sublimation of baser aspects as crude concepts like utility, pleasure, attraction, subservience, and procreation were romanticized into a fairy tale conception of “love”.
No not really paedophilia is not sex between consenting adults, all the other things are. Homosexuality is between consenting partners, a gimp suit and a whip consenting, they don’t naturally follow. Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not purely a choice, hence they are not the same, unless of course you can prove people are born paedophiles or have no choice in the matter?
I do agree that some things about sex make people happy, and some things don’t. It might be partner for life it might be partner for five minutes, but clearly the fact that the divorce rate is 50% means that it is not as clear cut as that.
You missed the point. It was about “happiness” brought about by sex.
The fact the divorce rate is 50% in the united states means this:
Too many False Christians praying to a False God in False Churches. These blasphemers need to taste some Hell fires in their mouths.
When you give out the Privilege of marriage to animals, then yes, of course they will divorce and remarry, divorce and remarry, divorce and remarry.
When my greatgreatgreatgreat-ggggrandfather, the Originator of all morality, sat down and thought to himself “Hmmmm, what shall I make this Wedding Vow”, and he wrote in “Unto Death do us Part”. He wasn’t fucking lying about that. He wasn’t being sarcastic, or not serious. He meant it. He meant that, if a Man and Woman become married, then the Marriage is not invalidated until one Spouse is dead!!! And westerners, and false christians who deserve punishment, have forgotten the meaning of these words.
Here’s a lesson, that I’m sure even you can understand, Calrid.
Don’t make promises you can’t keep. Does that make sense??? I hope so. I know a lot of people in the west, as “brilliant” as humans are, fuck this one up.
Let’s hear it again. Don’t make promises you can’t keep. Now here’s the sugar on the top.
Don’t make promises To God that you really, really can’t keep!!! And the Marriage Vow is a promise to Divine Authority, to God. And if you want a “civil union” for the godless heathens and homos, then go and do that instead. Go join “the State” rather than Religion and Postchristianity. Because frankly, if you’re going to half-ass promises, and life itself, then that’s your prerogative. My Postchristianity is about Higher Morality, Transcendence, and Virtue. If you cannot live up to it…then don’t join it, simple as that. Don’t ever become married. Don’t ever make a promise, to a wife, that you can’t keep.
When my New Roman Chruches begin to pop up, and spread across the Western Hemisphere, then we will reinstate the “Unto Death do us Part” part of the wedding vow. And women who are not virgins can kiss marriage good bye. Sluts don’t deserve marriage. Postchristianity is going to become hardcore. Almost nobody alive will be able to live up to its tenants. And that’s fine.
That’s true elitism. That’s true virtue. That’s true honor. That’s true soul. That’s true spirit. That’s true faith. That’s true hope. That’s true ideal.
That’s True God. Those fucking heathen false Christians, who dole out marriages like fucking candy bars and snacks, have got to go.
When you trust commoners with Marriage, they fuck it up. Nobody is allowed to divorce in my New Roman Church, for any reason (save for death obviously). If you make a promise, To God, then it is absolute by nature! It is absolutely binding! For Eternity! That is where marriage comes from, my friends. That’s why I created this institution 5000 years ago. It’s not for everybody.
If you fuck up a marriage, then you fuck up a family.
“Ohhh, but this abusive husband is beating his wife and children!” Then the moron shouldn’t have married him in the first place! Use your fucking brains, people. If you don’t want to marry a loser, then don’t!!! In my eyes, those Eyes of the Lord, Marriage is absolute. Normal people, average people, mundane people, shouldn’t even think about the prospect of marriage.
It’s reserved for Royalty. It’s for the Godly natured. If you don’t plan to die for marriage, then don’t even consider it. Just have sex, like an animal, with other animals. Have sex with animals, and homosexuality, and do whatever makes you “feel happy”. I don’t give a fuck. Just don’t come into my Church. And don’t pass yourself off as a New Roman. Leave us, the fuck, alone.
Let us do our thing. You just throw away your lives at your own pleasure and leisure. Don’t intrude upon our happiness.
My happiness revolves around seeking out, and living up to the ideal of a Natural Monogamy.
This is all mine, all for me. You can’t have it. You’re not allowed my ideal. Go get your own. Go have a “civil union gay sex ceremony”. Have it ordained by your False God. Pretend that you’re “Husband and Wife” even though there’s two dikes, or two gays. Have fun pretending you’re man and woman. Because you’re not. Two penises and two vaginas is not the same thing.
You have your fantasy land bizzaro world. And I have mine. My “insanity” is man and woman, bond together in spirit, Holy matrimony.
I am The True Believer in God. You’re not. And all the other false christians are not. They’re blasphemers and heretics. Like mormons and evangelists. False christians with False churches.
You’ll have to pardon my immense anger, fire and brimstone here.
I cannot stand to see all these corruptions of my ideal, over time. Why was Man and Woman made for each other? And look what you humans have done.
Can you do one simple thing? Have you forgotten? Yes, you’ve forgotten. You don’t care about Faith anymore. You don’t care about Goodness or Value.
That’s why I’m here. That’s why I’m resurrected, to preach The Old Way again. It wasn’t wrong. We got it right the first time.
In fact, if you don’t care about Goodness, God, and Virtue, then we really have nothing left to talk about in this thread here. Just don’t respond to my views about monogamy, thanks in advance. Unless, of course, you are a True christian, and follower of Christ. If you are ready to kneel before our Lord thy God, then let’s converse more together about Holy Matrimony in this thread.
Heathens, non-believers, atheists, agnostics, piss off. Go have a gay sex civil union State marriage. Or go to your local false church, praying to a false god, and go get “married” there. Believe in it. Pretend. Pretend as if it’s the real thing, rather than a sham and a fake, a fraud. A copy, a mirror of real and true marriage.
Because you probably will not live up to the ideal, Unto Death do us Part.
You’re not ready for it. Are you ready to fail, when your entire life is at stake??? No, of course you’re not. True Marriage is not for cowards. It’s only available to those who are suicidal, and ready to die, for love, and Holy Communion. It’s only for people with Zeal, and True Faith in God.
I don’t see it happening in such a drastic way. Most likely, men had food, and women wanted it. So, it was a mutual agreement.
If it were to happen in such a violent way, as you described, women would simply keep running away, probably to other more tolerating men…with food.
Probate court is where you go to contest wills, not get wills.
Here’s a lesson you might not understand, it doesn’t take Christianity to believe in honour. I have never slept around on any woman I have had nor would I, married or not.
The Celts believed in the sanctity of marriage, that it was a lifetime commitment, as do many other religions, as do many atheists. It’s not a matter simply of religion though it’s human nature to lust, whatever their religion. I can understand your ire at the Christians who forsake their own guidelines (surely they are expected to follow their guidelines and in abandoning them they are only playing lip service to your faith) however I personally believe that they are not realistic, I think time has shown how little Christianity can control baser instincts (The abandonment of tenets is pretty telling and not just sexual ones). It can’t be just be put down to monogamy being natural, that would be remiss, it must be something inherent that leads us astray from monogamy, if not why would people do it? Sure such people are damned and sinners, but such people are common place and always have been. If monogamy was a natural state then divorce would be a rarity.
Atheists tend to get divorced less than Christian’s in the US. Please spare us the false God stuff.
atheism.about.com/od/atheistfami … ivorce.htm
I could hazard a guess that atheists tend to have more partners before they get married, tend to fornicate more often to seal compatibility, and thus are more likely to find the right one, but this would be speculation. It does need some serious research though.
Monogamy can be natural if your purpose in life can accept variety
If it cannot accept variety then it is not natural to you
I am posting this in another unrelated thread, but found it applies here quite well.
[i]I fundamentally disagree with the institution of marriage–on a number of levels. The sentence (from The Communist Manifesto)—“Our bourgeoisie, not content with having the wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take supreme delight in seducing each other’s wives.”—really agrees with me, though the seduction aspect is now distributed rather evenly between the sexes.
The obvious social implications of a sort of mutual slavery with tax benefits and assured sexual gratification aside, I feel the concept of love is, for the most part, a freakishly veritable Godzilla of Hallmark Holidays…so long as you endow this terrible radioactive lizard with telepathic powers of manipulation. Love is created by a stewing concoction of romantic tales, personal insecurities/complexes and the libidinal drives; which is not to say such an emotion never occurs, but in the “romantic” manner, it is at best a rarity in the absence of fairy tails and clichéd Shakespearean dramas.
Further, the nuclear family, while presenting some benefits, mirrors an exclusive guild, creating micro-factions in the society—it verges on micro-racism. Filial piety must be abolished.[/i]
If you say one more righteous line about premarital sex making one a “slut”, Trajicomic, I will find you and throw up in your lap. Rest assured. Because your great X 10^88 grandfather wrote it down? Are you kidding me? You say certain people “have got to go”? Marriage itself has got to go. If your monogamy is all it’s cracked up to be, you don’t need a social contract, you don’t need a ring, a certificate or any other poppycock. You don’t need a ceremony. You don’t need a vow.