well no it's not legally recognized as such

jerseyhoya wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:what is the answer, though?

Some practical differences between same sex marriage and polygamy

harumph. I covered the gist of this in one sentence

also, let's be real, it is ridiculous for a guy from South Carolina to bring up. Utah maybe not so much.

TenuredVulture wrote:If we're going to go by what the Bible says, if you divorce and remarry, you are in a polygamous relationship. So, it's pretty widespread and legally recognized.

what law is this?

biblical?

I think what he's saying is that in the eyes of the bible is that if you divorces and later remarry your still considered to be polygamous.

Where is this legally recognized? I doubt it's law anywhere, but I'm happy to be wrong.

dude long day at work?

people get divorced and remarried (legally) all over the world (at least most of it)

tv is saying that in the eyes of the bible you are in a polygamous marriage, not in the eyes of the law

Any thoughts on Syriza winning in Greece?

Bucky wrote:dude long day at work?

people get divorced and remarried (legally) all over the world (at least most of it)

tv is saying that in the eyes of the bible you are in a polygamous marriage, not in the eyes of the law

Yes, very actually.

I know that is what tv meant, largely, but I am genuinely curious what he was thinking as he typed out the words "legally recognized." I mean, it's the opposite. I wasn't sure if he was just making it up because he was trying to juice up his post and make it more interesting, or if it is actually widespread.

Doll Is Mine wrote:Any thoughts on Syriza winning in Greece?

i like it, tomato pie hates it

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders

"The Syriza victory in the Greek elections tells us that people around the world will no longer accept austerity for working families while the rich continue to get much richer."

pacino wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:Any thoughts on Syriza winning in Greece?

i like it, tomato pie hates it

Two likes.

Doll Is Mine wrote:Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders

"The Syriza victory in the Greek elections tells us that people around the world will no longer accept austerity for working families while the rich continue to get much richer."

Werthless wrote:

Bucky wrote:dude long day at work?

people get divorced and remarried (legally) all over the world (at least most of it)

tv is saying that in the eyes of the bible you are in a polygamous marriage, not in the eyes of the law

Yes, very actually.

I know that is what tv meant, largely, but I am genuinely curious what he was thinking as he typed out the words "legally recognized." I mean, it's the opposite. I wasn't sure if he was just making it up because he was trying to juice up his post and make it more interesting, or if it is actually widespread.

Divorcing and remarrying according to the bible is polygamy. Divorcing and remarrying, even multiple times,results in a legally recognized marriage. Ergo, polygamy is legally recognized.

Jeeze TV, why's your state still so backwards?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/2 ... 67164.html

Wtf, celebrating an act of treason.

TenuredVulture wrote:Divorcing and remarrying according to the bible is polygamy. Divorcing and remarrying, even multiple times,results in a legally recognized marriage. Ergo, polygamy is legally recognized.

the bible isn't the law

Blasphemer!

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Divorcing and remarrying according to the bible is polygamy. Divorcing and remarrying, even multiple times,results in a legally recognized marriage. Ergo, polygamy is legally recognized.

the bible isn't the law

He's just saying caching the gay marriage, why not polygamy in the religious mind set is hypocritical. Biblically speaking polygamy is already widespread and normal, so why aren't these righteous crusaders fighting that fight too?

I get what he's aiming for, but he's manipulating terms to do it. I also get that when anti-gay marriage advocates make the gay/polygamy comparison, it's coming from a pretty negative place, but just pointing that out isn't an answer to the original question of 'why not polygamy?'