Islamic Polygamy Rhetoric Totally Debunked

[Narnian]

Most of the above, Moose, is just pure waffle. You have not properly addressed my points and are using Argumentum Ad Nauseum.

Let's look at what you call 'believer" numbers;

Iraq

15-64 years: 57.3% (male 7,776,257/female 7,576,726) 200,000 extra men despite 3 years of war

Afghanistan
15-64 years: 53% (male 8,436,716/female 8,008,463) - 400,000 more males, despite the ongoing wars.

Pakistan:
15-64 years: 56.9% (male 48,214,298/female 46,062,933) 2milllion extra guys

Islamic Rep of Iran
15-64 years: 69% (male 24,133,919/female 23,245,255) another 2 million extra

Saudi has an extra 3 million men.

>what she (65 year old widow) can do for me

This is where Christian values part ways with Islamic ones. All you are thinking is of what she can do for you. Christ tells you to give unconditionally and not expect her to have sex for the money (aka "polygamy").

I will find you some information about adolescent girls' experience of their hormones in a little while. I have seen plenty of written material on this matter, so I doubt it will be difficult to find it.

[I]>a typical girl is eligible for marriage at about 10I]

Prove this absurd claim!

David and Solomon were not sinners perhaps in the eyes of Mo, because he committed similar atrocities.

[moose7237]

Most of the above, Moose, is just pure waffle. You have not properly addressed my points and are using Argumentum Ad Nauseum.

Let's look at what you call 'believer" numbers;

Iraq

15-64 years: 57.3% (male 7,776,257/female 7,576,726) 200,000 extra men despite 3 years of war

Afghanistan
15-64 years: 53% (male 8,436,716/female 8,008,463) - 400,000 more males, despite the ongoing wars.

Pakistan:
15-64 years: 56.9% (male 48,214,298/female 46,062,933) 2milllion extra guys

Islamic Rep of Iran
15-64 years: 69% (male 24,133,919/female 23,245,255) another 2 million extra

Saudi has an extra 3 million men.

>what she (65 year old widow) can do for me

This is where Christian values part ways with Islamic ones. All you are thinking is of what she can do for you. Christ tells you to give unconditionally and not expect her to have sex for the money (aka "polygamy").

I will find you some information about adolescent girls' experience of their hormones in a little while. I have seen plenty of written material on this matter, so I doubt it will be difficult to find it.

[I]>a typical girl is eligible for marriage at about 10I]

Prove this absurd claim!

David and Solomon were not sinners perhaps in the eyes of Mo, because he committed similar atrocities.

Hello and Peace be to you friend,

Ok what about those numbers? So what if there is more males than females? Firstly, whose to say all of those males are muslim? Secondly, whose to say they are even interested in getting married at the time? Thirdly, whose to say they can afford marriage? Fourthly, whose to say some of them aren't even married? Fifthly, are any of those men jail inmates, or criminals, or have some sort of disease? Like I said you just can't bring up those numbers and say there aren't any women for men, because you have to take these factors into consideration. I know there is more men then women, but you can't say each and every man is looking for marriage at that possible given time and they can't find any one. I think you are trying to say "what if all those men are looking for women and they can't find any?" Also you have to take another factor into consideration, what if a 60 year old man is married to a 67 year old woman? You didn't account for the 65 and older category, so some men are married to older women. What an 18 year old guy is married to a 14 year old girl? You didn't take into consideration the 14 year old girl.

WHOA! I think you are trying to deceive everyone here. I said what can she do for me, NO WHERE did I mention sexually. I said, and I should have stated this one first, how strong is her faith in Allah, if her faith is strong and she can strengthen my faith, and I can afford to take care of her, I would take her as a wife.

I said once a girl has reached puberty she can get married? What's the problem with that? She is eligible to reproduce so whats the problem? Also, you can't force a girl to intercourse, so if she says I do not want to have intercourse at this time, then the man can't force her, but since they are married, and she doesn't have to worry about her parents getting on her case, I don't think she would personally care. But I don't know.

No David and Solomon were never sinners neither was Muhammad. They were infallible.

[Cynic Sage]

Err, I'd hate to burst your bubble with a Christian resource, but...

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/polygamy.html

Oh no, because I'm a christian I have to believe in polygamy because King David etc had more than one wife!

sarcasm off

JP wasn't arguing that we should beleive or practice polygamy today. If anything he was arguing that polygamy was a necessary evil in a time and place like that of King David and possibly Muhammad.

>Armstrong notes that there was probably a shortage of men in Arabia in >Muhammed's era, "which left a surplus of unmarried women who were often >badly exploited."

There is absolutely NO evidence of this whatsoever, and in fact there would be more evidence of the contrary - God was highly likely still producing 5 extra males per 100 females.

For starters:

1. You're evidence for God producing 5 extra males per 100 females during Mohammed's time, although plausible through modern eyes, is where exactly?
2. It was the men who would go off to fight in wars.
3. Medicine then wasn't what it is today.
4. I thought God left that "producing" stuff up to us.

There were no WMD in those days, like there are today, so you would have to "culll" these extra males by hand, ie with a sword or knife. There were no guns remember.

And no kevlar too. Although from reading many of your posts the impression I get is that apparently not only is a gun needed to kill an ancient middle-easterner but a silver-bullet as well.

Karen Armstrong is a novelist, she is not an historian. She failed her PhD thesis and she has about the same qualifications as I have.

True, but I bet her book's bibliography lists better sources than Wikipedia.

I'm wating to get my copy from the library, so I can check it out for myself.

To get a book published you have to say something that differs from the norm, so she chose to argue that Muhammad was somehow benign, when all evidence points to a murdering psychopath.

Hmmm... I'm interested in finding out where in the hadith the young Muhammad tortures small animals.

JP Holding has only quoted Armstrong and argued that the social conditions made it necessary, but he produces no evidence whatsoever. This article is just a waste of space.

Well, JP posts here at Theologyweb, so you can go PM him about his article if you wish.

SA today has a large male overpopulation;

Gender population in Saudi Arabia according to age group Age group (years) Percentage Number of Males Number of Females
0-14 38.2% 5,261,530 5,059,041
15-64 59.4% 9,159,519 6,895,616
65 and over 2.4% 342,020 302,005
http://www.wikiislam.com/w/index.php...ygyny_in_Islam

Note the highlighted.

>The matter is not that simple; the practice would almost certainly be >repugnant in our modern nation, because none of the social conditions exist >which exert a moral influence making polygamy a "necessary evil."

Well, why aren't 5 out of 100 women marrying an extra man as a "necessary evil" today, using the same logic???

Because marriage and having children is more a matter of survival in ancient agrarian, collectivistic societies than it is in today's post-industrial, individualistic societies.

The bottom line is this; we do NOT need to get married in order to "control ourselves". We have Christ to turn to - he in turns fills us with the strength and courage we need to develop our brains past "puberty". Sex is not a need. Love is, food, is, water is, shelter is.

<Sarcasm>

Wow, the man you marry will be a very lucky man.

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

Seriously though, you talking about the teachings of Jesus or Zardoz there?

Seriously, what do you think is easier for the commonner-class Horny-Habibu of aproximately the bronze-age through 600 AD.

• Financially supporting several wives (and their children), often buying them seperate estates in order to get laid.
• Financially supporting one wife and her children in order to get laid.
• Having a romantic evening with Mama Thumb and her four daughters.

Have you at least stopped to read the OT, notice how the people that did practice polygamy in the OT were rich enough to afford to support multiple wives. Not to mention that marriage was a way for leaders to form aliances and contracts with other nations as well. This isn't "Crazy Mormon plantation"-polygamy we're talking about here.

One more thing - women should be treated well whether or not they are married - they deserve respect.

Unless they use wikipedia as a source for a college paper, or use contemporary statistics to criticize a practice used for survival in the ancient world. Then you can laugh at them.

Will society fall to pieces if a few million men die in a war?

Rumsfeld, is that you?

Look at post WW2 europe. After 24 million men died, post WW2 europe experienced the biggest growth in history. If you look at the rise of the GPI, it goes from a horizontal line to an almost vertical one.

<Sarcasm>

Yep, comparing the industrial nations of 1940's Europe to to agrarian nations of 600 AD's Middle East. They are so much alike, no significant differences in how their societies work at all. Would you like a Mandarin apple or a Macintosh orange?

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

[Narnian]

1. You're evidence for God producing 5 extra males per 100 females during Mohammed's time, although plausible through modern eyes, is where exactly?
2. It was the men who would go off to fight in wars.
3. Medicine then wasn't what it is today.
4. I thought God left that "producing" stuff up to us.

And no kevlar too. Although from reading many of your posts the impression I get is that apparently not only is a gun needed to kill an ancient middle-easterner but a silver-bullet as well.

Hi Johnny,
I recall from my genetics classes that we have not changed for many millenia. The extra 5 males are produced to make up for war deaths. Medicine wasn't what it is today on both males AND females, ie so both died. "Producing stuff"? I don't understand this statement. Guns did the job faster so more are killed faster. In pre WMDs days, it was a long and gory job. It took Muhammad and all his men, working around the clock for 2 days and nights, to kill 700 men they had captured. They had to keep stopping to resharpen their swords.

True, but I bet her book's bibliography lists better sources than Wikipedia.

I'm a total academic failure. Wiki is your evidence.

Hmmm... I'm interested in finding out where in the hadith the young Muhammad tortures small animals.

Humans were his speciality. Though he had his men do the dirty work. It sounds like you don't know much about Islam. Although you have a Wiki phobia, here is a website http://www.wikiislam.com/
and a website and forum; http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/ Ali Sina's essays are the best.

Well, JP posts here at Theologyweb, so you can go PM him about his article if you wish.

I have read his posts on Zoroastrianism and have found many errors in them. I would debate with him, but don't have time right now.

Because marriage and having children is more a matter of survival in ancient agrarian, collectivistic societies than it is in today's post-industrial, individualistic societies.

Ah, but you are missing something - Islam is for ALL TIME! The Koran is a book that is relevant for NOW as well as then.

Wow, the man you marry will be a very lucky man.

I have been happily married for 10 years.

Show me one person who has died without sex.

Seriously though, you talking about the teachings of Jesus or Zardoz there?

I can't get up the movie, would you please tell me in words what your point is?

Seriously, what do you think is easier for the commonner-class Horny-Habibu of aproximately the bronze-age through 600 AD.

• Financially supporting several wives (and their children), often buying them seperate estates in order to get laid.
• Financially supporting one wife and her children in order to get laid.
• Having a romantic evening with Mama Thumb and her four daughters.

The solution is that women and men should be given equal social standing and respect, and not be made property. Virginity of the woman (ie first wife) should not be an issue. Funds for widows and orphans should be maintained. Widowed women should seek husbands from other clans/tribes, since there should be enough to go round, as we have seen by stats etc.

Have you at least stopped to read the OT, notice how the people that did practice polygamy in the OT were rich enough to afford to support multiple wives. Not to mention that marriage was a way for leaders to form aliances and contracts with other nations as well. This isn't "Crazy Mormon plantation"-polygamy we're talking about here.

Yes, I have read the entire OT cover to cover. Women are not objects to be used as "a way to form alliances and contracts"! We are human beings with the same feelings and brains as men.

Have you stopped to read Islamic texts?

Rumsfeld, is that you?

You caught me!

<Sarcasm>

Yep, comparing the industrial nations of 1940's Europe to to agrarian nations of 600 AD's Middle East. They are so much alike, no significant differences in how their societies work at all. Would you like a Mandarin apple or a Macintosh orange?

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

[/QUOTE]

Islam is a Macintosh orange - you described it perfectly

[Dee Dee Warren]

And not only would medicine be bad for both, but wars are not a constant source of death or potential death while casualties in child-bearing were constant and a part of life. So I really doubt there were a prolonged period of excess women, perhaps right after a big war or something, but that would even out.

What you got is the powerful men wanted more. And the powerful men until perhaps very recently got what they want. The average Joe of David's and Solomon's time didn't have multi-wives either.

[barnasha]

first of all, I am confused why someone called polygamy a necessary 'evil'. In a strict society which forbade illegal sex (sex without marriage) and where men died on the battlefield so much, should a women live alone and in seclusion for the last 30 years of her life? "Turning to Christ" or whatever religion doesn't really help in the realm of living your life as a hermit. Well, it does, but, it's better to have a family, people to love and care for. It's more healthy :)

If you take the prophet Mohammad as an example, many of his wives were widows who wouldn't have had much of a life had they not had a husband. At least several of his wives were actually widows of some of his most faithful men who were martyred in battle. In Arabia, at that time, many of the men were killed at a young age, so the women vastly outnumbered the men.

One last note, if you examine what Allah revealed to the prophet in the Qur'an, it says something like "You may marry more than one wife, if you can treat them all equally, but it is better for you to only have one"

How impossible would it be for those of us today to treat more than one spouse equally? In times of hardship where so many women are widowed, it's one thing. But in the here and now, I for one can say it would be literally impossible for me to have two spouses.

On the topic of Islam and polygamy, I am not aware of any muslims in today's society that have more than one wife - but it may be the case in places like Afghanistan or Africa. If anyone knows about polygamy as practiced today, especially by the 3 main Abrahamic religions, it would be a good thing to post about.

[Narnian]

should a women live alone and in seclusion for the last 30 years of her life? "Turning to Christ" or whatever religion doesn't really help in the realm of living your life as a hermit. Well, it does, but, it's better to have a family, people to love and care for. It's more healthy :)

Hi Barnasha, we have already gone into this - since God already produces 5 extra males per 100 females, and that probably almost as many women would die in childbirth as on the battlefield (see above my analysis of pre WMD days), there would have been no need, especially if widows are "permitted" to marry into other clans or tribes. HOWEVER, if "virgins" are required by single men, as first wives, then yes you may have a problem pairing widows, but it is far better to create virginity as a non issue, than to keep this sexist ideology and then the need to pair up an extra widow or 2. If women had equal social standing as males from the beginning, and were not "bargaining chips", "men's property" and "sex objects" as they were with Mo, David and Solomon, then you wouldn't have such a problem in the first place.

If you take the prophet Mohammad as an example, many of his wives were widows who wouldn't have had much of a life had they not had a husband. At least several of his wives were actually widows of some of his most faithful men who were martyred in battle. In Arabia, at that time, many of the men were killed at a young age, so the women vastly outnumbered the men.

There is no evidence of this, only heresay. It is highly likely that there were just the same numbers as there are today. Little has changed genetically. Muhammad's excuses for having all those wives are phoney. I believe he suffered from sex addiction, as a lot of such cult leaders suffer from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_addiction

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/...lewassex.shtml

One last note, if you examine what Allah revealed to the prophet in the Qur'an, it says something like "You may marry more than one wife, if you can treat them all equally, but it is better for you to only have one"

Ah, but why say it at all? By saying this, Allah has permitted it, IF you can "treat them equally" then you can get around this easily. If Allah was saying "don't marry more than one wife because you can't treat all equally" then why didn't he say that?

Where are women's voices in this? How will the first wife feel? How would you feel if your wife married an extra man - some poor lonely widower who had lost his wife in childbirth, who was desperate for love and sex? Would you allow your wife to marry him so that he won't be alone since there is a shortage of women in almost every country on earth? Or would you tell him to "turn to Christ"?

If anyone knows about polygamy as practiced today, especially by the 3 main Abrahamic religions, it would be a good thing to post about.

Yes, my ex husband's brother married an extra women because the first one wasn't a good enough "baby making machine" He wanted more children, and she wasn't producing fast enough or could only produce one, so he found a spare "machine" and "treated both "machines" equally".

Also, in my ex's home town, I went to the wedding of a man who was marrying an extra wife - I don't know what the reason was for that.

Oh, and I also remembered another relative of my in laws whose wife lost half her leg in a car accident, up to her knee, so he married another wife who still had two legs.

That's 3 from my own ex family. I'm pretty certain that this "phenomenon" is widespread. Many muslim men are without wives, and they are the ones who migrate to western countries or go in boat loads to Australia etc. Boat people refugees are about 96% single men. Actually, they are refugees of Islam, but they are unaware of this ... which is another topic.

So, whichever way you look at it, the whole polygamy game is totally phoney, sexist and oppressive. The results of this male domination, and women viewed a "half" is evident by the latest research results from the UN demonstrate.

http://www.unicef.org/publications/index_36587.html

http://www.unicef.org/publications/f...en__2007_e.pdf

The bottom line is that Islamic countries are doing the worst, as far as child health, education, prosperity etc. THey have found the correlation between male dominated cultures and poverty. In societies where women have equal standing as men, the results show the reverse.

Bottom-bottom line is that the Koran has been proven wrong.

[Narnian]

MATERNAL DEATH RATE FOR WOMEN

In Sub-Saharan Africa - the most undeveloped place on earth - 6.25% of women die in childbirth. Since 7th century Arabia probably had even less amenities for women than today's Africa, we can assume that 6.25% would be indicative of a minimum number of deaths in that day and age. So, now we are looking at least one spare man per 10 women, probably more so.

http://www.who.int/reproductive-heal...y_2000/mme.pdf

The plot thickens ...

[moose7237]

should a women live alone and in seclusion for the last 30 years of her life? "Turning to Christ" or whatever religion doesn't really help in the realm of living your life as a hermit. Well, it does, but, it's better to have a family, people to love and care for. It's more healthy :)

Hi Barnasha, we have already gone into this - since God already produces 5 extra males per 100 females, and that probably almost as many women would die in childbirth as on the battlefield (see above my analysis of pre WMD days), there would have been no need, especially if widows are "permitted" to marry into other clans or tribes. HOWEVER, if "virgins" are required by single men, as first wives, then yes you may have a problem pairing widows, but it is far better to create virginity as a non issue, than to keep this sexist ideology and then the need to pair up an extra widow or 2. If women had equal social standing as males from the beginning, and were not "bargaining chips", "men's property" and "sex objects" as they were with Mo, David and Solomon, then you wouldn't have such a problem in the first place.

If you take the prophet Mohammad as an example, many of his wives were widows who wouldn't have had much of a life had they not had a husband. At least several of his wives were actually widows of some of his most faithful men who were martyred in battle. In Arabia, at that time, many of the men were killed at a young age, so the women vastly outnumbered the men.

There is no evidence of this, only heresay. It is highly likely that there were just the same numbers as there are today. Little has changed genetically. Muhammad's excuses for having all those wives are phoney. I believe he suffered from sex addiction, as a lot of such cult leaders suffer from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_addiction

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/...lewassex.shtml

One last note, if you examine what Allah revealed to the prophet in the Qur'an, it says something like "You may marry more than one wife, if you can treat them all equally, but it is better for you to only have one"

Ah, but why say it at all? By saying this, Allah has permitted it, IF you can "treat them equally" then you can get around this easily. If Allah was saying "don't marry more than one wife because you can't treat all equally" then why didn't he say that?

Where are women's voices in this? How will the first wife feel? How would you feel if your wife married an extra man - some poor lonely widower who had lost his wife in childbirth, who was desperate for love and sex? Would you allow your wife to marry him so that he won't be alone since there is a shortage of women in almost every country on earth? Or would you tell him to "turn to Christ"?

If anyone knows about polygamy as practiced today, especially by the 3 main Abrahamic religions, it would be a good thing to post about.

Yes, my ex husband's brother married an extra women because the first one wasn't a good enough "baby making machine" He wanted more children, and she wasn't producing fast enough or could only produce one, so he found a spare "machine" and "treated both "machines" equally".

Also, in my ex's home town, I went to the wedding of a man who was marrying an extra wife - I don't know what the reason was for that.

Oh, and I also remembered another relative of my in laws whose wife lost half her leg in a car accident, up to her knee, so he married another wife who still had two legs.

That's 3 from my own ex family. I'm pretty certain that this "phenomenon" is widespread. Many muslim men are without wives, and they are the ones who migrate to western countries or go in boat loads to Australia etc. Boat people refugees are about 96% single men. Actually, they are refugees of Islam, but they are unaware of this ... which is another topic.

So, whichever way you look at it, the whole polygamy game is totally phoney, sexist and oppressive. The results of this male domination, and women viewed a "half" is evident by the latest research results from the UN demonstrate.

http://www.unicef.org/publications/index_36587.html

http://www.unicef.org/publications/f...en__2007_e.pdf

The bottom line is that Islamic countries are doing the worst, as far as child health, education, prosperity etc. THey have found the correlation between male dominated cultures and poverty. In societies where women have equal standing as men, the results show the reverse.

Bottom-bottom line is that the Koran has been proven wrong.

Hello and Peace be to you friend,

You have not responded to my previous post, I hope you are doing well Narnian. Firstly, where and how is the Quran proven wrong? Next, you say that Muhammad was a sex addict. Do you have any proof of that? NOPE. How old was Muhammad when he first got married? He was 25? So I assume he is not a sex addict, because hormones kick in at about 13, and he waited until he was 25 years old. His first wife Khadija, was a widow and she was 40! So young looks were not really in his favor. Next, at the age of 51 when Khadija died, that's when he married again, I think. Or it was 2 years after Khadija died when he married again. All of his wives, with the exception of Aisha and his last wife I thin, were all widowers, you can wikipedia it if you don't believe me.

Next, where do you get your info that Muhammad, Solomon, and David, were oppressors to women? And how is Islam oppressive to women? If anyone is oppressive to women it would be the apostle Paul.

[Narnian]

Moose, of course I believe you - I have studied the life of Muhammad in detail. Khadija was a wealthy Christian cousin (which also strongly suggests that Mo was a christian), and his uncle Warraqa arranged the wedding; it was a christian wedding and Warraqa saw it a good thing in order to train Mo for the priesthood, of the Nazarite or Ebionite order. But Warraqa died before Mo had his full training. Without Warraqa and Khadija, Mo then changed as he grew in power and wealth, beginning with the looting of caravans (which allah conveniently told him to carry out).

The only difference between Mo and, say, David Koresh, was that the latter didn't kill people, except his own in a suicide mission. They both had "revelations" from God, they both had pubescent wives - sent by "god" - and they were both charismatic cult leaders - 2 of many 100000s this world has seen.

Here is a humerous analysis of Mo's behaviour as a sex addict;

http://www.islamreview.com/articles...clewassex.shtml

You can read about sex addiction here;

http://www.unicef.org/publications/index_36587.html

Sex addiction doesn't begin at the age of 13 - it is unrelated to hormones because it is a psychological-physical condition like alcoholism or drug addiction. It usually begins around the early 20s.

How do the stats on women and men prove the koran wrong? Because God is already producing an extra 5 men per 100 women. Obviously, the natural intention is monogamy. You are following a sex addict's 'teachings', not God's.

[moose7237]

Moose, of course I believe you - I have studied the life of Muhammad in detail. Khadija was a wealthy Christian cousin (which also strongly suggests that Mo was a christian), and his uncle Warraqa arranged the wedding; it was a christian wedding and Warraqa saw it a good thing in order to train Mo for the priesthood, of the Nazarite or Ebionite order. But Warraqa died before Mo had his full training. Without Warraqa and Khadija, Mo then changed as he grew in power and wealth, beginning with the looting of caravans (which allah conveniently told him to carry out).

The only difference between Mo and, say, David Koresh, was that the latter didn't kill people, except his own in a suicide mission. They both had "revelations" from God, they both had pubescent wives - sent by "god" - and they were both charismatic cult leaders - 2 of many 100000s this world has seen.

Here is a humerous analysis of Mo's behaviour as a sex addict;

http://www.islamreview.com/articles...clewassex.shtml

You can read about sex addiction here;

http://www.unicef.org/publications/index_36587.html

Sex addiction doesn't begin at the age of 13 - it is unrelated to hormones because it is a psychological condition like alcoholism or drug addiction. It usually begins around the early 20s.

How do the stats on women and men prove the koran wrong? Because God is already producing an extra 5 men per 100 women. Obviously, the natural intention is monogamy. You are following a sex addict's 'teachings', not God's.

Hello and Peace be to you friend,

I think you are very wrong to say that Muhammad was Christian or training to be a christian. That is very very false, because even Muhammad knows very well that Jesus never claimed to be God. Next, No Muhammad was not a sex addict, the link you gave me doesn't even work. Back to Aisha, her age is disputed, the hadiths are in contradiction to each other about her age. She was not 6 or 9 when she got married. Next, where did Muhammad loot caravans? Please give me proof.

No the stats you show are wrong. If anything, with your stats, monogomy isn't even possible. But Allah never said polygamy must happen, it is our choice to choose polygamy or not. According to your stats, monogamy is not possible. Since there are 5 more men per 100 women. Also, since you want to bring up part of Islam marriage, you completely ignore the rest, with that being, not everybody is Muslim and some people are gay so they won't marry the opposite sex.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I notice Moose avoided this:

Where are women's voices in this? How will the first wife feel? How would you feel if your wife married an extra man - some poor lonely widower who had lost his wife in childbirth, who was desperate for love and sex? Would you allow your wife to marry him so that he won't be alone since there is a shortage of women in almost every country on earth?

Clue - unless there is something abnormal, a woman will feel horrible. In ideal circumstances, polygamy is repulsive and abhorrent to the very nature of women. Are there some circumstances where it would be justified? Yes. But all things being equal, it is one of the most insulting and demeaning things you could suggest.

Once agan, how would you feel if you had to share your wife with another man? What makes you think that most women would not feel the same? Women inherently are worth more than that kind of drivel.

Please don't dodge the question by going Paul this, David this. I agree there are cultural and other circumstances would could justify it. But it is not ideal, and not what women ontologically deserve.

[Narnian]

1% of people say they are gay in the US, so you still have at least 4 extra men per 100 women. I provided you with the stats of muslim countries - ALL have a large excess of men, and lack of muslim women of marriageable age DESPITE all the wars, WMDs and other jihadi antics.

Mo's christianity was not the Catholic one - he was of a chrisitan sect which was nazarite or ebionite; some researchers believe they are the same and others believe they were slightly different in beliefs, but this sect did not believe that Jesus was God; he was just a prophet. They also relied on jewish law and beliefs etc. There is evidence that the nazarites-ebionites fled to Arabia to escape persecution from the roman church.

A book you should get is The Priest and the Prophet by Joseph Azzi, a lebanese scholar - in fact you can read his books online in arabic somewhere here on this website;

http://www.muhammadanism.com/default.htm

I can't remember his arabic name ....

[moose7237]

I notice Moose avoided this:

Where are women's voices in this? How will the first wife feel? How would you feel if your wife married an extra man - some poor lonely widower who had lost his wife in childbirth, who was desperate for love and sex? Would you allow your wife to marry him so that he won't be alone since there is a shortage of women in almost every country on earth?

Clue - unless there is something abnormal, a woman will feel horrible. In ideal circumstances, polygamy is repulsive and abhorrent to the very nature of women. Are there some circumstances where it would be justified? Yes. But all things being equal, it is one of the most insulting and demeaning things you could suggest.

Once agan, how would you feel if you had to share your wife with another man? What makes you think that most women would not feel the same? Women inherently are worth more than that kind of drivel.

Please don't dodge the question by going Paul this, David this. I agree there are cultural and other circumstances would could justify it. But it is not ideal, and not what women ontologically deserve.

Hello and Peace be to you friend,

I never avoided that, I said a muslim woman is not allowed to marry but one man, and he must be Muslim. A muslim man can marry a christian(non trinitarian) a jew, or a monotheistic believer in Allah, and he can marry up to 4 wives. You might think this is unfair, but the man has to treat each woman equally, so if the woman wants her own house away from the other women, the man must grant it to her and all of his wives if they request it. The reason women can't marry more than one man, is because of 1: a woman menstruates, so intercourse in unnacceptable and a man is agressive, so more than one man would be hard to deal with sexually when she is on her period, another is children. Men would argue on whose child the woman has brought up, they won't know which man it would belong to. Also, a woman in Islam doesn't provide for her husband the husband provides for the woman, so if one gives makes more money than another and he spoils her more than another man, then she might favor one over the other.

Also, where in the bible does it say polygamy is not allowed?

[Dee Dee Warren]

You didn't answer my question. Please don't deflect and just answer the question. Perhaps it would help you to quote one line of what I said and then answer, then quote because you didn't address what I said at all. And there is no such thing as a nontrinitarian Christian, don't be silly.