The Polygamy Poll

[Sarah]

If men are really concerned about women being taken care of, and feel polygamy is the best path for that, then why should they feel to limit the freedom of their wives to go be with another man to take care of her? His main concern should be the welfare of his wife and children, and if she isn't happy with what is happening, then why should he feel to force her to stay with him when he is free to get as many wives as he pleases? He should not feel possessive or threatened by this proposal. Again, I'm not advocating for living this now. It could only work within a covenant family living the United Order, where the men have covenanted together to take care of everyone.

First, let's break this idea that polygamy is for taking care of women. It isn't. It is for letting women attain the blessings and opportunities promised to Eve to be mothers in Zion.

It isn't some welfare plan.

As for women wanting to be with men, studies on Bonobo chimps suggest that families pair off with three or four females and one male, except the females are as sexual with the other females as with the male. Of course you might say that humans are not to be compared to animals, and that holds merit as dolphins mate by a group of males going after the female all at once. Of course one could assume primate behaviors are better to observe as they have similar DNA.

Point is though that even studies on various aspects of sexuality as well as polyandry shows that females tend to prefer to not have multiple male partners, but gravitate to the lifestyles of those Bonobo chimps. Of course I do not believe evolution is what got us here, but there is a lesson in this (that the Creator intended polygamy?). Also, size differentials between genetically similar males and females suggest that we are designed for one-man and two to three women. Mammals with little size differences tend to be monogamist while major size differences (large males, small females) tend to be geared to harems.

Did you see the article someone just posted about women being found to be less monogamist in feeling than men? Women get bored with the same man faster than a man gets bored according to the article. I personally can see myself liking polyandry. Women like variety just as much as the men, and ultimately, I think we will all be with those we feel most comfortable and attracted to. I assume that we will be able to feel a heightened love and connection for our same gender in heaven as well, but that will go both ways. Men and women can have deep feelings of sisterhood and brotherhood, but it doesn't have to involve our reproductive system. If the animal kingdom teaches us anything, it is that there is variety, and there is no one single way all animals mate. They each have their pattern. But it is survival of the fittest and in a fallen state as well, so I don't look to the animal kingdom for the pattern of heaven.

[Benaishtart]

If men are really concerned about women being taken care of, and feel polygamy is the best path for that, then why should they feel to limit the freedom of their wives to go be with another man to take care of her? His main concern should be the welfare of his wife and children, and if she isn't happy with what is happening, then why should he feel to force her to stay with him when he is free to get as many wives as he pleases? He should not feel possessive or threatened by this proposal. Again, I'm not advocating for living this now. It could only work within a covenant family living the United Order, where the men have covenanted together to take care of everyone.

First, let's break this idea that polygamy is for taking care of women. It isn't. It is for letting women attain the blessings and opportunities promised to Eve to be mothers in Zion.

It isn't some welfare plan.

As for women wanting to be with men, studies on Bonobo chimps suggest that families pair off with three or four females and one male, except the females are as sexual with the other females as with the male. Of course you might say that humans are not to be compared to animals, and that holds merit as dolphins mate by a group of males going after the female all at once. Of course one could assume primate behaviors are better to observe as they have similar DNA.

Point is though that even studies on various aspects of sexuality as well as polyandry shows that females tend to prefer to not have multiple male partners, but gravitate to the lifestyles of those Bonobo chimps. Of course I do not believe evolution is what got us here, but there is a lesson in this (that the Creator intended polygamy?). Also, size differentials between genetically similar males and females suggest that we are designed for one-man and two to three women. Mammals with little size differences tend to be monogamist while major size differences (large males, small females) tend to be geared to harems.

Did you see the article someone just posted about women being found to be less monogamist in feeling than men? Women get bored with the same man faster than a man gets bored according to the article. I personally can see myself liking polyandry. Women like variety just as much as the men, and ultimately, I think we will all be with those we feel most comfortable and attracted to. I assume that we will be able to feel a heightened love and connection for our same gender in heaven as well, but that will go both ways. Men and women can have deep feelings of sisterhood and brotherhood, but it doesn't have to involve our reproductive system. If the animal kingdom teaches us anything, it is that there is variety, and there is no one single way all animals mate. They each have their pattern. But it is survival of the fittest and in a fallen state as well, so I don't look to the animal kingdom for the pattern of heaven.

You can personally see yourself liking polyandry? Wow, that ultimately represents the chaotic nature of the matriarchy. Woman sleeps with more than one man and then we don’t know who’s child it is. Is reaps of chaos, disintegration, and cuckoldry. There’s a reason way less societies have been ok with polyandry than even homosexuality. The reason these women want to be with another man is that most women will crave to be the alpha male. Most men are betas and women will get bored of the beta and will crave the alpha. It’s in the nature of women to be hypergamous. It’s built into genetic codes that have physically and spiritually been around since time immemorial.

[Sarah]

If men are really concerned about women being taken care of, and feel polygamy is the best path for that, then why should they feel to limit the freedom of their wives to go be with another man to take care of her? His main concern should be the welfare of his wife and children, and if she isn't happy with what is happening, then why should he feel to force her to stay with him when he is free to get as many wives as he pleases? He should not feel possessive or threatened by this proposal. Again, I'm not advocating for living this now. It could only work within a covenant family living the United Order, where the men have covenanted together to take care of everyone.

First, let's break this idea that polygamy is for taking care of women. It isn't. It is for letting women attain the blessings and opportunities promised to Eve to be mothers in Zion.

It isn't some welfare plan.

As for women wanting to be with men, studies on Bonobo chimps suggest that families pair off with three or four females and one male, except the females are as sexual with the other females as with the male. Of course you might say that humans are not to be compared to animals, and that holds merit as dolphins mate by a group of males going after the female all at once. Of course one could assume primate behaviors are better to observe as they have similar DNA.

Point is though that even studies on various aspects of sexuality as well as polyandry shows that females tend to prefer to not have multiple male partners, but gravitate to the lifestyles of those Bonobo chimps. Of course I do not believe evolution is what got us here, but there is a lesson in this (that the Creator intended polygamy?). Also, size differentials between genetically similar males and females suggest that we are designed for one-man and two to three women. Mammals with little size differences tend to be monogamist while major size differences (large males, small females) tend to be geared to harems.

Did you see the article someone just posted about women being found to be less monogamist in feeling than men? Women get bored with the same man faster than a man gets bored according to the article. I personally can see myself liking polyandry. Women like variety just as much as the men, and ultimately, I think we will all be with those we feel most comfortable and attracted to. I assume that we will be able to feel a heightened love and connection for our same gender in heaven as well, but that will go both ways. Men and women can have deep feelings of sisterhood and brotherhood, but it doesn't have to involve our reproductive system. If the animal kingdom teaches us anything, it is that there is variety, and there is no one single way all animals mate. They each have their pattern. But it is survival of the fittest and in a fallen state as well, so I don't look to the animal kingdom for the pattern of heaven.

You can personally see yourself liking polyandry? Wow, that ultimately represents the chaotic nature of the matriarchy. Woman sleeps with more than one man and then we don’t know who’s child it is. Is reaps of chaos, disintegration, and cuckoldry. There’s a reason way less societies have been ok with polyandry than even homosexuality. The reason these women want to be with another man is that most women will crave to be the alpha male. Most men are betas and women will get bored of the beta and will crave the alpha. It’s in the nature of women to be hypergamous. It’s built into genetic codes that have physically and spiritually been around since time immemorial.

Joseph said the angels put up too many stakes. You make a lot of assumptions. My husband is an alpha in many ways. I am a super pleaser and never wish to dominate him or anyone. I agree that this sphere isn't set up for polyandry, but if nothing is hid in the hereafter we will have no problem knowing who's child is who's.

[MMbelieve]

First, let's break this idea that polygamy is for taking care of women. It isn't. It is for letting women attain the blessings and opportunities promised to Eve to be mothers in Zion.

It isn't some welfare plan.

As for women wanting to be with men, studies on Bonobo chimps suggest that families pair off with three or four females and one male, except the females are as sexual with the other females as with the male. Of course you might say that humans are not to be compared to animals, and that holds merit as dolphins mate by a group of males going after the female all at once. Of course one could assume primate behaviors are better to observe as they have similar DNA.

Point is though that even studies on various aspects of sexuality as well as polyandry shows that females tend to prefer to not have multiple male partners, but gravitate to the lifestyles of those Bonobo chimps. Of course I do not believe evolution is what got us here, but there is a lesson in this (that the Creator intended polygamy?). Also, size differentials between genetically similar males and females suggest that we are designed for one-man and two to three women. Mammals with little size differences tend to be monogamist while major size differences (large males, small females) tend to be geared to harems.

Did you see the article someone just posted about women being found to be less monogamist in feeling than men? Women get bored with the same man faster than a man gets bored according to the article. I personally can see myself liking polyandry. Women like variety just as much as the men, and ultimately, I think we will all be with those we feel most comfortable and attracted to. I assume that we will be able to feel a heightened love and connection for our same gender in heaven as well, but that will go both ways. Men and women can have deep feelings of sisterhood and brotherhood, but it doesn't have to involve our reproductive system. If the animal kingdom teaches us anything, it is that there is variety, and there is no one single way all animals mate. They each have their pattern. But it is survival of the fittest and in a fallen state as well, so I don't look to the animal kingdom for the pattern of heaven.

You can personally see yourself liking polyandry? Wow, that ultimately represents the chaotic nature of the matriarchy. Woman sleeps with more than one man and then we don’t know who’s child it is. Is reaps of chaos, disintegration, and cuckoldry. There’s a reason way less societies have been ok with polyandry than even homosexuality. The reason these women want to be with another man is that most women will crave to be the alpha male. Most men are betas and women will get bored of the beta and will crave the alpha. It’s in the nature of women to be hypergamous. It’s built into genetic codes that have physically and spiritually been around since time immemorial.

Joseph said the angels put up too many stakes. You make a lot of assumptions. My husband is an alpha in many ways. I am a super pleaser and never wish to dominate him or anyone. I agree that this sphere isn't set up for polyandry, but if nothing is hid in the hereafter we will have no problem knowing who's child is who's.

Its a weak argument this day and age to say we wouldnt know who the father is, easy peasy to figure it out. The other way is to track the female cycle so one 1 man gets to sleep with the wife at that time, another way is the husbands can look different enough that physical traits reveal it. Another way is she could just marry brothers.

I can see tons of benefits to having another husband. My husband is gone all the time and it sure would be nice to have a man around when hes not here and so would children. Plus, the second husband could have skills and talents and blessings that husband 1 doesnt have. Another bonus, no having to call up hometeachers to help give a blessing. The husbands can also become friends and have a male they trusted and had same values to go do stuff with. They can be companions. I mean, how many LDS men dont have friends? Seems like tons dont.

Double the muscle, double the income (if both worked mom could actually stay home with the kids), double the labor, double the skill, double the priesthood and theres a built in life insurrance policy incase one of them died -the family wont become a single parent household. In a one male multiple female scenario, if the man dies then the family is really in a bad way. Who would want to come in an take care of another mans polygamous set up? Many dont even want to take over one womans children.

Despite the arguments against multiple husbands, there are some practical reasons to do it.

If a woman marries an infertile man then why not get a second husband? Thats one of the main reasons for polygamy and this way, the sterile man still gets a family and is not cast off.

[FattyArBeltBuckle]

Its a weak argument this day and age to say we wouldnt know who the father is, easy peasy to figure it out.

Thousands of dads are left in shock as DIY paternity tests soar

"20 per cent of men will learn they are not the father of the child they are testing "

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -soar.html

[Benaishtart]

I can’t believe how many &#%! enablers are on this forum now. The second coming can’t come soon enough.

[Zathura]

I can’t believe how many &#%! enablers are on this forum now. The second coming can’t come soon enough.

[Zathura]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you have any?

I've spent 1000's of hours reading both sides of the issue. I've come to the conclusion there are only two options. One is Joseph Smith was both a liar and an adulter. The second is he told the truth and had nothing to do with polygamy, spiritual wifery, celestial marriage, etc. I choose to believe that Joseph was an honorable man and prophet. I don't believe you can teach and practice polygamy and be honorable or a prophet.

Note - The above is my opinion after many hours of prayer and study. Of course you're free to have your own opinion. Respectfully.

Of course there is a third option, whether you think it is viable or not is irrelevant, it’s still an option.

Joseph Smith was an honest and righteous man who was called of god to restore the church in its fullness, who practiced polygamy and polyandry as commanded, and refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it.

"refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it"

Would that include the time that Joseph and Hyrum excommunicated the guy named Hiram Brown who literally did nothing but practice polygamy? Was his soul just a necessary casualty?

Let's create a little scenario. Pretend that President Nelson truly practices the true and Holy practice of Polygamy but none of us know it. He actually has UP TO 40 REAL LIFE WIVES, they might be your neighbors! You might know most of them! Pretend that currently at this moment, God approves of polygamy(But you don't know he does).
He gets up in General Conference and says the following:

“… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.” (This is originally Hyrum as President of the church from Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844))

Let's also pretend that your D&C Section 101 said the following:

Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again

Also pretend that LITERALLY A MONTH before President Nelson dies , he gathers up alll the Saints in Salt Lake Valley and gives a speech, and again claims that he has but ONE WIFE and is not guilty of the claims that others have been making of him.

Then the newly anointed President Dallin H Oaks proceeds to preach Polygamy throughout the next 30 years, telling you "President Nelson taught me all of this in private" "Yes I know he was pretty adamant that it was bad, but it reaaaaally isn't guys"

** End of Scenario**

That's literally what happened. That's why I can't accept your third option.

[cab]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you have any?

I've spent 1000's of hours reading both sides of the issue. I've come to the conclusion there are only two options. One is Joseph Smith was both a liar and an adulter. The second is he told the truth and had nothing to do with polygamy, spiritual wifery, celestial marriage, etc. I choose to believe that Joseph was an honorable man and prophet. I don't believe you can teach and practice polygamy and be honorable or a prophet.

Note - The above is my opinion after many hours of prayer and study. Of course you're free to have your own opinion. Respectfully.

Of course there is a third option, whether you think it is viable or not is irrelevant, it’s still an option.

Joseph Smith was an honest and righteous man who was called of god to restore the church in its fullness, who practiced polygamy and polyandry as commanded, and refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it.

"refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it"

Would that include the time that Joseph and Hyrum excommunicated the guy named Hiram Brown who literally did nothing but practice polygamy? Was his soul just a necessary casualty?

Let's create a little scenario. Pretend that President Nelson truly practices the true and Holy practice of Polygamy but none of us know it. He actually has UP TO 40 REAL LIFE WIVES, they might be your neighbors! You might know most of them! Pretend that currently at this moment, God approves of polygamy(But you don't know he does).
He gets up in General Conference and says the following:

“… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.” (This is originally Hyrum as President of the church from Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844))

Let's also pretend that your D&C Section 101 said the following:

Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again

Also pretend that LITERALLY A MONTH before President Nelson dies , he gathers up alll the Saints in Salt Lake Valley and gives a speech, and again claims that he has but ONE WIFE and is not guilty of the claims that others have been making of him.

Then the newly anointed President Dallin H Oaks proceeds to preach Polygamy throughout the next 30 years, telling you "President Nelson taught me all of this in private" "Yes I know he was pretty adamant that it was bad, but it reaaaaally isn't guys"

** End of Scenario**

That's literally what happened. That's why I can't accept your third option.

.... And then Wendy Nelson denies to her own death that President Nelson ever taught it.... And then she is repeatedly called things like "a child of hell" or "one of the damnedest liars I know of on this earth" or "literally the most wicked woman on this earth" by President Oaks...

[Zathura]

I've spent 1000's of hours reading both sides of the issue. I've come to the conclusion there are only two options. One is Joseph Smith was both a liar and an adulter. The second is he told the truth and had nothing to do with polygamy, spiritual wifery, celestial marriage, etc. I choose to believe that Joseph was an honorable man and prophet. I don't believe you can teach and practice polygamy and be honorable or a prophet.

Note - The above is my opinion after many hours of prayer and study. Of course you're free to have your own opinion. Respectfully.

Of course there is a third option, whether you think it is viable or not is irrelevant, it’s still an option.

Joseph Smith was an honest and righteous man who was called of god to restore the church in its fullness, who practiced polygamy and polyandry as commanded, and refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it.

"refrained from casting his pearls before the swine who would not accept it"

Would that include the time that Joseph and Hyrum excommunicated the guy named Hiram Brown who literally did nothing but practice polygamy? Was his soul just a necessary casualty?

Let's create a little scenario. Pretend that President Nelson truly practices the true and Holy practice of Polygamy but none of us know it. He actually has UP TO 40 REAL LIFE WIVES, they might be your neighbors! You might know most of them! Pretend that currently at this moment, God approves of polygamy(But you don't know he does).
He gets up in General Conference and says the following:

“… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.” (This is originally Hyrum as President of the church from Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844))

Let's also pretend that your D&C Section 101 said the following:

Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again

Also pretend that LITERALLY A MONTH before President Nelson dies , he gathers up alll the Saints in Salt Lake Valley and gives a speech, and again claims that he has but ONE WIFE and is not guilty of the claims that others have been making of him.

Then the newly anointed President Dallin H Oaks proceeds to preach Polygamy throughout the next 30 years, telling you "President Nelson taught me all of this in private" "Yes I know he was pretty adamant that it was bad, but it reaaaaally isn't guys"

** End of Scenario**

That's literally what happened. That's why I can't accept your third option.

.... And then Wendy Nelson denies to her own death that President Nelson ever taught it.... And then she is repeatedly called things like "a child of hell" or "one of the damnedest liars I know of on this earth" by President Oaks...

forgot about that part.
Yep......

[MMbelieve]

Its a weak argument this day and age to say we wouldnt know who the father is, easy peasy to figure it out.

Thousands of dads are left in shock as DIY paternity tests soar

"20 per cent of men will learn they are not the father of the child they are testing "

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -soar.html

20% is not bad given the about of sexual immorality and infidelity.

[FattyArBeltBuckle]

20% is not bad given the about of sexual immorality and infidelity.

As long as someone is paying the cash and prizes. Who cares about fraud.

[Fiannan]

Its a weak argument this day and age to say we wouldnt know who the father is, easy peasy to figure it out. The other way is to track the female cycle so one 1 man gets to sleep with the wife at that time, another way is the husbands can look different enough that physical traits reveal it. Another way is she could just marry brothers.

If that is what you want, then go for it. Maybe you could marry men of different races so you could be certain whose child is which.

Of course this goes totally against the foundations of the Abrahamic religions, but hey, in a post-Christian, post-modernistic society I suppose it could be accepted. And with all the beta men in their super-tight jeans and male buns there would be guys into it.

[Fiannan]

I can’t believe how many &#%! enablers are on this forum now. The second coming can’t come soon enough.

Are you sure this is the right term? Maybe this works better:

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=&#%!

[FattyArBeltBuckle]

And with all the beta men in their super-tight jeans and male buns there would be guys into it.

Tight jeans might be cutting off blood supply that enables testicular fortitude. Isn't it time for the Nu-Male?

[Davka]

And with all the beta men in their super-tight jeans and male buns there would be guys into it.

Tight jeans might be cutting off blood supply that enables testicular fortitude. Isn't it time for the Nu-Male?

Heaven help us.

There are so many lies in this article, I don't even know where to start. It makes me want to go curl up and cry not just for the state the world is in, but what my poor sons and daughters will be facing as young adults in 10-20 years.

I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who says "monkeys do it, so we should too." Aren't these the same people who believe we *evolved* from apes? If our intelligence can evolve, then why not our moral compass and ability to tell right from wrong? Some animals eat their young, should we? Goodness people, are we monkeys or human beings?

I've been married to my husband for 11 years and he still makes my heart go pitter patter, and the intimate part of our relationship has never been better... I know he would say the same. So I don't buy what these people are selling.

Want to improve your sex life? Stop focusing on your sex life. Focus on this instead: "Only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile...and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly..."

It is possible for a husband to lust after his wife or vice versa...lust is not the same as sexual arousal. It is using another person for selfish purposes, sexual or otherwise, rather than giving your love to them. When husbands and wives are basing their relationships on lust rather than love, this is what happens.

And, yes, I know this thread is about polygamy, not human nature gone awry, so I will tie my comment into polygamy by asking how anyone who supports what this article says could complain about someone else wanting to practice polygamy. Whether you think it is of God or not, you can't argue this is okay and polygamy isn't. #amirightoramiright

[Fiannan]

And, yes, I know this thread is about polygamy, not human nature gone awry, so I will tie my comment into polygamy by asking how anyone who supports what this article says could complain about someone else wanting to practice polygamy. Whether you think it is of God or not, you can't argue this is okay and polygamy isn't. #amirightoramiright

Or this article from CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/25/heal ... index.html

Voltaire once said the way to see who rules over you is to ask yourself who it is forbidden to criticize. I thing a take on this is that if one wants a litmus test on whether polygamy is righteous or not they might ask which "lifestyle" is criticized the most. Nowadays you can practice anything and everything but the two lifestyles that seem to touch a nerve with the left are:

Married family with lots of kids.

Polygamist family with lots of kids.

Think there is something to the idea these are from God, while the other lifestyles aren't?

[Davka]

And, yes, I know this thread is about polygamy, not human nature gone awry, so I will tie my comment into polygamy by asking how anyone who supports what this article says could complain about someone else wanting to practice polygamy. Whether you think it is of God or not, you can't argue this is okay and polygamy isn't. #amirightoramiright

Or this article from CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/25/heal ... index.html

Voltaire once said the way to see who rules over you is to ask yourself who it is forbidden to criticize. I thing a take on this is that if one wants a litmus test on whether polygamy is righteous or not they might ask which "lifestyle" is criticized the most. Nowadays you can practice anything and everything but the two lifestyles that seem to touch a nerve with the left are:

Married family with lots of kids.

Polygamist family with lots of kids.

Think there is something to the idea these are from God, while the other lifestyles aren't?

Make that "married/polygamist family with lots of kids that doesn't vaccinate" and you've got a winner!

[Benaishtart]

These articles are literally cultural Marxist programming being shoved down our throats. It’s all satan’s plan to prevent children from being born. First it was the sexual revolution that broke up families. Then abortion. Then pornography. Then the stigmatization of having children. Then lgbtqxyz. Now they’re trying to get strait people into polyamory aka cuckoldry. They hate the idea of the continuation of patriarchal lines, that’s why they’re promoting cuckoldry. They hate virtue and they won’t women to loose all of it. They’re jealous of stable solid relationships because they know they’ll never be able to have one unless they repent. Lust is the basis of all deviances and fetishes and will never bring any kind of satisfaction. They’re sour losers and our trying to make it so that no one can have real intimacy in this life or in eternity. We’re truly living in the last days and I’m hoping there will still be real believing saints who will want to have children.

[harakim]

I feel like it's hard to want to have children when you think of the way the world is.

[FattyArBeltBuckle]

Whether you believe in polygamy or not. Patriarchal systems are expansive, while feminist societies or gynecocracies contract.

[Benaishtart]

Whether you believe in polygamy or not. Patriarchal systems are expansive, while feminist societies or gynecocracies contract.

Good point. Most societies that have been polyandrous have been in the Himalayas. Brutal environment with hardly any land to farm. Can’t support demographic expansion. So limit the number of babies being born. Anti-Natalist to the core. It represents societal demise. I guess population control is now in vogue.

[Sarah]

The covenant of marriage and the sealing aspect of it is what is important, and a promise to be be loyal to one another and the children. No reason why many children couldn't also be produced in a group marriage setting, like what they tried in the Oneida community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community
Kind of interesting that this experiment happened right after Joseph died. And there have been other similar experiments, but of course they all failed because they were inspired by Satan. But he is a good counterfeiter. They had their problems and tried to enforce rules that I wouldn't like, like giving up parental rights. I'm not advocating any of us try this, but I think it very plausible that this is more of what the plural marriage order in Enoch's city and the Celestial Kingdom looks like.

[Davka]

Whether you believe in polygamy or not. Patriarchal systems are expansive, while feminist societies or gynecocracies contract.

Good point. Most societies that have been polyandrous have been in the Himalayas. Brutal environment with hardly any land to farm. Can’t support demographic expansion. So limit the number of babies being born. Anti-Natalist to the core. It represents societal demise. I guess population control is now in vogue.

Is there any question that it is?

Saturday's Warrior was singing "Who Can Survive?" 40 years ago. I "only" have 4 kids and people look at me like I have 4 heads instead. Preventing people from having sex with the opposite sex and encouraging them to have relationships with each other instead is actually an even more brilliant tactic to limit reproduction than trying to convince a monogamous couple to limit their family to 0-2 kids, lets alone ensuring they do so.

[Fiannan]

Whether you believe in polygamy or not. Patriarchal systems are expansive, while feminist societies or gynecocracies contract.

Good point. Most societies that have been polyandrous have been in the Himalayas. Brutal environment with hardly any land to farm. Can’t support demographic expansion. So limit the number of babies being born. Anti-Natalist to the core. It represents societal demise. I guess population control is now in vogue.

Only allowed there for women to marry two brothers.