|
Multiple marriage was invented by God to develop in man the diplomatic and people skills such that he can enjoy the company of his wives *without* them nagging. Those who can't imagine it (and I'm not saying you can't) should not even consider making an offer of marriage to a second wife. Others may have difficulty imagining happy multiple marriage - does it mean I should be criminalised for it? It is not a remote point of theory, I am actually right now having discussions with a woman to be my second wife. She's the one who made the offer to me! My wife, I, and the prospective second wife can all agree. Can someone please tell me why it is more of someone else's business than it is of ours, especially that of a complete stranger whose only qualification is being self-opinionated and inclined to violence? So it's not traditional in a Christian culture. I couldn't give a shit, I'm not a Christian, and I regard Christians as a pack of intellectual, moral and sexual perverts. Why should I be literally threatened with imprisonment to force me to comply with their religion? God it shits me to tears. Much of the reason you can't afford more than one wife is because of the government's welter of meddling laws blatantly biased against men's interests. You probably could afford more than one if the government:
a) wasn't paying pefectly healthy and able women to do nothing all day, but sponge off the taxpayer
b) wasn't overriding contracts between spouses and de facto spouses, by arbitration characteristically biased against men's interests
c) wasn't criminalising the payment of market rates for labor below an arbitrary minimum set by government on the basis of mere subjective opinion
d) wasn't forcibly taking money, to subsidise the kinds of services which women unequally seek, and for which woman has traditionally sought the coverture of man. It may be said that these laws are necessary for purposes of sexual equality, but the premise is incorrect. Women aren't equal to men, because of the differences between men and women. If women were equal to men, then the outcome of consensual relations would be equal, wouldn't it? The fact that it's not, shows that the starting proposition is false. And if they are not equal in fact, why should, or can, they be equal in value? They can't! Women can only approach or approximate equality with men if men are unequally taxed and burdened to pay for it. But a state of 'equality' in which men are unequally taxed and burdened and controlled to provide for women's typical interests, is not a state of equality at all.
| 
