Australian Politics Forum - Protecting Religious Marriage Rights

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Oct 20^th, 2017 at 7:24am

Some Muslims and Conservative Christians believe it's their right to enter into polygamous marriages. Why are traditional polygamous marriages illegal, since other religious rights are important.

And why are conservative christians not defending their right to enter into god given polygamy marriages

Polygamy is permissible in Islam. As Allah (S.W.T.) authorized man to many up to four wives, provided that he should treat them all as equals and should not distinguish one of them above the others.

Islam considers man to be responsible of observing equally and justice among his wives in all kinds of material treatment as equality among them in habitation, clothing and all means of adequate support. But strict equally in emotions and feeling is beyond the ability of man, therefore he is not obliged to treat his wives on the same foot in emotional matters.

Alla (S.W.T.) stated in the Quran: “You will not be able to deal equality between your wives”.

http://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/150663/islam-and-polygamy

Man (95) recounts 68-year journey in polygamy

Polygamy! It’s one word that elicits countless labels and exposes one to stigma. In most Christian settings, it’s seen as being evil, unholy and a bedrock of jealous and unending rivalry. In Zimbabwe, polygamy is not strange, but with the rise of evangelism, it’s growing to be seen as evil, unGodly and unclean. But Sekuru Enoch Makuwi Kadiki (95) of Mutoko, about 144km east of the capital, is not afraid to be different.

He is a happy polygamous man. Sekuru Kadiki insists he has enjoyed 68 years of polygamous wedded bliss with his two wives, Jessica and Winnet. He has, with good skill, handled a polygamous marriage just the same way someone in a monogamous union would do. Sekuru Kadiki, who has nine children with his first wife and 10 with the second, says he became a polygamist by accident.

http://www.herald.co.zw/man-95-recounts-68-year-journey-in-polygamy/

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20956
A cat with a view

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #1 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:09am

Its OK to promote open homosexuality.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to promote same sex marriage.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, marriage to multiple partners at the same time.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, marrying your sister/mother/aunt.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, sex in private with your domestic pet/sheep/goat/dog.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

.

Q.
What harm is there, in giving 'rise' to every desire i feel, and want to engage in, JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO DO IT ?

I want you to be tolerant [bigot!], so that i can experience, what i want to experience!

Q.
If one person, wants to experience what it is like to murder another person,
just for the pleasure of it, just for the 'thrill' of it,
IS THAT OK TOO, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO DO IT ?

Google;
Jemma Lilley, accused of the thrill kill murder of autistic teenager Aaron Pajich, Perth, Australia

Quote:

Perth teen Aaron Pajich murdered so woman could feel 'euphoria' of killing: court told

By Joanna Menagh

Updated October 02, 2017

A 43-year-old woman lured a teenager with autism to a suburban Perth house so her 26-year-old friend, who had written a book about a serial killer, could feel the "euphoria and exhilaration" of murdering someone, WA's Supreme Court has been told.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-02/women-face-trial-for-murder-of-autistic-pe...

.

Yadda said....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1434160480/1#1
Quote:

THINK!

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant" of those who exhibit commendable, and good behaviour ???

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant" of the upright, the moral, the good person ???

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant", towards those who exhibit;
integrity in their dealings with others, ???
fidelity and faithfulness towards others [who have placed trust in them], ???
honesty in their dealings with others, ???
justness in their dealings towards others, ???
fairness in their dealings with others, ???

No.

It is only those whose behaviour could be deemed to be bad, and contemptible, and immoral, who need to seek to engender the tolerance of others, towards themselves.

And this is what 'humanists' are teaching us, and our children, that we [society] should be tolerant of wickedness.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #2 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:09am

Each to his own, but when you live or come here you play by local rules.....

I do believe this series of de factos that some apparently engage in according to the gutter media, needs to be looked at, though why any woman in this day and age would accept such a deal is beyond me.

But then, when you look at some of the chicks they've employed in the prison system and what they've done, you really have to wonder. Then I see the chicks on the freeway here - two settings on the throttle - full on or nothing and never once look around them.

No real sense at all and emotion driven in some strange way only known to them - maybe the Musos are right and they should be kept in a cotton cage to protect them from themselves, and to protect society from the results of their unthinking actions.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #3 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:15am

Yadda wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:09am:

Its OK to promote open homosexuality.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to promote same sex marriage.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, marriage to multiple partners at the same time.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, marrying your sister/mother/aunt.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

Its OK to make lawful, sex in private with your domestic pet/sheep/goat/dog.

What harm can it do ?

Its private love.

.

Q.
What harm is there, in giving 'rise' to every desire i feel, and want to engage in, JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO DO IT ?

I want you to be tolerant [bigot!], so that i can experience, what i want to experience!

Q.
If one person, wants to experience what it is like to murder another person,
just for the pleasure of it, just for the 'thrill' of it,
IS THAT OK TOO, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO DO IT ?

Google;
Jemma Lilley, accused of the thrill kill murder of autistic teenager Aaron Pajich, Perth, Australia

Quote:

Perth teen Aaron Pajich murdered so woman could feel 'euphoria' of killing: court told

By Joanna Menagh

Updated October 02, 2017

A 43-year-old woman lured a teenager with autism to a suburban Perth house so her 26-year-old friend, who had written a book about a serial killer, could feel the "euphoria and exhilaration" of murdering someone, WA's Supreme Court has been told.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-02/women-face-trial-for-murder-of-autistic-pe...

.

Yadda said....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1434160480/1#1
Quote:

THINK!

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant" of those who exhibit commendable, and good behaviour ???

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant" of the upright, the moral, the good person ???

Do we need to extend any special effort, to be "tolerant", towards those who exhibit;
integrity in their dealings with others, ???
fidelity and faithfulness towards others [who have placed trust in them], ???
honesty in their dealings with others, ???
justness in their dealings towards others, ???
fairness in their dealings with others, ???

No.

It is only those whose behaviour could be deemed to be bad, and contemptible, and immoral, who need to seek to engender the tolerance of others, towards themselves.

And this is what 'humanists' are teaching us, and our children, that we [society] should be tolerant of wickedness.

You are hard to quote here with all this stuff....

Anyway, the final result of the kind of thinking you are discussing here is the totalitarian state - someone 'feels' that Joe Bloggs is not totally committed to the Party line and/or is an enemy of the State, so Joe Bloggs must be gulaged or executed.

Many people simply cannot see that their mindset is in reality that of the totalitarian- they assume - wrongly - that their mindset is all about everyone being free and equal, by the allocation of any kinds of different 'rights' to any who want it.

It's a very subtle process and that is why it is called Cultural Marxism - although Cultural Stalinism is more like it in some arenas.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #4 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:22am Conservative christians say think of the children. Children should be influenced by both males and females. So polygamy marriage must be superior to single male/female situations. Stop denying children to multiple parents of either or both sexes, within the protection of traditional religious marriage.
Back to top	IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #5 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:39am

____ wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:22am:

Conservative christians say think of the children. Children should be influenced by both males and females. So polygamy marriage must be superior to single male/female situations.

Stop denying children to multiple parents of either or both sexes, within the protection of traditional religious marriage.

I doubt kids would agree.. they are very attached to their birth parents and do not take in the same way to any outsider..... mum and dad will always be mum and dad, and calling someone a substitute or whatever does not change that.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #6 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:36am Well ________ once you allow SSM what argument can you possibly have against polygamy? It's a slippery slope.
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 131477 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #7 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:39am Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:36am: Well ________ once you allow SSM what argument can you possibly have against polygamy? It's a slippery slope. I have no argument against it. Do you?
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #8 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:41am You have no argument against same sex marriage EGGY...
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 131477 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #9 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:46am Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 9:41am: You have no argument against same sex marriage EGGY... Correct. And, I have no argument against polygamy. Do you? If so, what is it?
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #10 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 4:38pm The law states Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. that negates homosexuals and polygamy... I think common law also has statutes against both re marriage. Not sure it that is the right terminology. But hey I'm too busy to care right now.
Back to top	IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #11 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 6:25pm

Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 4:38pm:

The law states Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
that negates homosexuals and polygamy... I think common law also has statutes against both re marriage.
Not sure it that is the right terminology. But hey I'm too busy to care right now.

Only since 2004, and done because of political party manipulation.

This shows the concept of marriage is flexible.

We can return it back to the true traditional religious version, were polygamy was included.

Terms of the amendments[
Before 2004, there was no definition of marriage in the 1961 Act, and the definition was based in the common law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_Act_1961_(Australia)#Marriage_Amendment_A...

Back to top

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #12 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 6:30pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:39am:

____ wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:22am:

Conservative christians say think of the children. Children should be influenced by both males and females. So polygamy marriage must be superior to single male/female situations.

Stop denying children to multiple parents of either or both sexes, within the protection of traditional religious marriage.

I doubt kids would agree.. they are very attached to their birth parents and do not take in the same way to any outsider..... mum and dad will always be mum and dad, and calling someone a substitute or whatever does not change that.

They will still have mum and dad, only difference is it will be plural and so superior to only one of each.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57150
Here
Gender: male

Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights
Reply #13 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 6:47pm

Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 4:38pm:

The law states Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
that negates homosexuals and polygamy... I think common law also has statutes against both re marriage.
Not sure it that is the right terminology. But hey I'm too busy to care right now.

The same common law ruling today would be in favour of same sex marriage, it changed.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 131477 Gender:	Re: Protecting Religious Marriage Rights Reply #14 - Oct 20^th, 2017 at 6:51pm Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 4:38pm: The law states Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. that negates homosexuals and polygamy... We know why you don't like SSM: "It's icky". What's your argument against polygamy?
Back to top	IP Logged