Is Polygamy Wrong?

[One Bad Pig]

Ever heard of non-violent resistance? Of course not.

It works really well against those who are not willing to use deadly force to impose their will.

[Secular Liberation]

It works really well against those who are not willing to use deadly force to impose their will.

Tell that to British Colonial troops and racist segregationists.

[One Bad Pig]

Tell that to British Colonial troops and racist segregationists.

They weren't, obviously; there were countervailing pressures which made them generally unwilling to use deadly force.

[Adrift]

You obviously did not read what I said.

During the time of early Israel, killing a bride for not having an intact hymen was not considered immoral. Most Christians today, justify the killing of brides without intact hymen during the time period of ancient Israel with various justificantions. Today, however, killing a bride for not having an intact hymen on her wedding night would be considered murder, even by the overwhelming majority of Christians.

The definition of "murder" and the definition of a "justified killing" have changed...even among the followers of Yahweh.

Yeah, I figured you'd have a hard time with this. That black and white fundamentalist mentality that you struggled with when you were calling yourself a Christian is still acting as a mental barrier for you today. Your point in posts #2, #10, #12 and so on is that morality is not objective, and that it has changed through the course of time, correct? But you're wrong. Morality has not changed even if context changes. Ancient Israelis did not kill brides for not having an intact hymen (no matter how you read Deut. 22 13-21). The accusation was adultery. Adultery is still just as immoral today as it was within ancient Israel. The morality has not changed. That Christians do not kill women for adultery does not mean that adultery is now considered moral, or that the meaning of "murder" has changed. "Murder" is the unjust taking of life. Context, of course, tells us what is considered the unjust taking of life. That was just as true then as it is today. That we live in a different cultural/spiritual context than the kingdom of Israel does not in any way mean that the definition of murder has somehow changed over the course of time. Murder still means the unjust taking of life.

[Gary]

Yeah, I figured you'd have a hard time with this. That black and white fundamentalist mentality that you struggled with when you were calling yourself a Christian is still acting as a mental barrier for you today. Your point in posts #2, #10, #12 and so on is that morality is not objective, and that it has changed through the course of time, correct? But you're wrong. Morality has not changed even if context changes. Ancient Israelis did not kill brides for not having an intact hymen (no matter how you read Deut. 22 13-21). The accusation was adultery. Adultery is still just as immoral today as it was within ancient Israel. The morality has not changed. That Christians do not kill women for adultery does not mean that adultery is now considered moral, or that the meaning of "murder" has changed. "Murder" is the unjust taking of life. Context, of course, tells us what is considered the unjust taking of life. That was just as true then as it is today. That we live in a different cultural/spiritual context than the kingdom of Israel does not in any way mean that the definition of murder has somehow changed over the course of time. Murder still means the unjust taking of life.

Yes, I've heard all the Christian justifications for why it was moral for your Deity to order the slaughter of tens of thousands of little children and babies. But I and most of the non-Christian world believe that your justifications for these barbarous acts are immoral. Therefore, we believe, that YOU are immoral.

Your pathetic, Iron Age mentality regarding morality disgusts me.

I eagerly await the day when your belief system regarding the brutal, vindictive, vengeful Canaanite god Yahweh joins the other ancient superstition-based worldviews ...such as that of Baal, Zeus, and Jupiter... in the dust bin of world history.

[Apologiaphoenix]

So your relative morality Adrift disagrees with Gary's relative morality.

It's a wonder he gets so upset over something that's just a matter of opinion.

[Adrift]

So your relative morality Adrift disagrees with Gary's relative morality.

It's a wonder he gets so upset over something that's just a matter of opinion.

It's a bit amusing to watch him abandon his argument, refuse to acknowledge his error, and then throw a fit unrelated to his initial claim. I am not being hyperbolic when I say that it concerns me that people like him are practicing medicine. I'm not sure I'd trust him to have the maturity and the acumen to work a concession stand at a movie theater.

[Gary]

So your relative morality Adrift disagrees with Gary's relative morality.

It's a wonder he gets so upset over something that's just a matter of opinion.

You are exactly right. But my relative morality is the morality of my herd...which just so happens to be YOUR herd. You are stuck with our rules (morality) whether you like them or not.

We are not going to let you kill brides with non-intact hymen, stone children who curse their parents, or slaughter the children and babies of "non-believers" of your ancient superstition...even if you believe that your ancient Deity demands it.

[Gary]

It's a bit amusing to watch him abandon his argument, refuse to acknowledge his error, and then throw a fit unrelated to his initial claim. I am not being hyperbolic when I say that it concerns me that people like him are practicing medicine. I'm not sure I'd trust him to have the maturity and the acumen to work a concession stand at a movie theater.

You are an evil man.

[Apologiaphoenix]

You are exactly right. But my relative morality is the morality of my herd...which just so happens to be YOUR herd. You are stuck with our rules (morality) whether you like them or not.

We are not going to let you kill brides with non-intact hymen, stone children who curse their parents, or slaughter the children and babies of "non-believers" of your ancient superstition...even if you believe that your ancient Deity demands it.

So if the Nazis had won WWII, could you say it was wrong to kill Jews?

[Jedidiah]

Ever heard of non-violent resistance? Of course not.

Did not work out so well for the Jews under the Nazis did it.

[One Bad Pig]

It's a bit amusing to watch him abandon his argument, refuse to acknowledge his error, and then throw a fit unrelated to his initial claim. I am not being hyperbolic when I say that it concerns me that people like him are practicing medicine. I'm not sure I'd trust him to have the maturity and the acumen to work a concession stand at a movie theater.

You scored a direct hit with this one.

[Gary]

So if the Nazis had won WWII, could you say it was wrong to kill Jews?

In my moral world view and that of the vanquished Allied peoples, yes. The new world order under the Nazis would say, no. But I and many people in the world would resist the new morality of the Nazis until we achieved ultimate victory over the fascist sons-of-businesses and re-established a morality that abhors anti-Semitism and genocide.

The morality of the ruling majority (and sometimes, the ruling minority) is not absolute. It changes with time and cultural conditions. But MY morality is constant on anti-Semitism: It is evil and must be resisted.

[Gary]

You scored a direct hit with this one.

And you, Piggy, have now sunk to his level of immaturity and maliciousness (in the sewage).

Congratulations.

[Adrift]

In my moral world view and that of the vanquished Allied peoples, yes. The new world order under the Nazis would say, no. But I and many people in the world would resist the new morality of the Nazis until we achieved ultimate victory over the fascist sons-of-businesses and re-established a morality that abhors anti-Semitism and genocide.

The morality of the ruling majority (and sometimes, the ruling minority) is not absolute. It changes with time and cultural conditions. But MY morality is constant on anti-Semitism: It is evil and must be resisted.

"Morality changes with the times and culture!" "morality is not absolute"

"What if the Nazi's won"

"Uh, uh, uh....MY morality is constant"

You can almost see his brain melting down when forced to actually process logic that goes against his fundamentalist wiring.

Gary, the truth is, you'd be a goose-stepping Nazi sympathizer if the Nazi's won.