Zelia
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
CotrolYourHole wrote: SirsBabyDoll wrote: While polygamy is supported by multiple world religions, I can tell you that at least in Islam, there are conditions.
1) You have to be able to provide for each other the wives EQUALLY. That means mentally, emotionally, physically, quality time, AND financially. Keep in mind that even today, a woman was given an agreed upon "dowery" by the suitor and that COULD NOT be taken back. This was done in order to provide for the wife in the event that she became a widow. It was her's to do with as she pleases. It was mandated in order to care for the widows, orphans, and destitute during a period when many of the men had been killed during war. It was NOT simply for the purpose of getting extra pussy. 2) It was an ENM situation. If the first (or other) wives did not agree on the new addition, it was not allowed. In many, many cases, it was simply to provide protection and stability to women and children who would otherwise not have that. I am Muslim but for my own reasons, I cannot do polygamy or polyamory. Thanks for giving the Islamic perspective on this. I agree that there has to be a foundation of love & support for all wives involved. The Old Testament has regulations on it as well (can’t take 2 sisters because they will turn into rival wives, can’t take a mom & daughter, etc). I definitely agree that a polygamous marriage has to be much more than just a source of extra pussy for the man  I know that I’d struggle to provide for 2 stay-at-home wives right now at age 26, so even though me & my wife want a 2nd wife (she likes both the homemaking help aspect, the more siblings for our kids aspect AND of course the threesome aspect since she’s bicurious ) we will prob end up waiting till we’re in our 30s. Which is a bit of a bummer tbh, cause spiritually speaking I DO prefer to keep sex within the committed space of marriage, but there’s just so many beautiful & lonely young subs out there that we’re probably gonna end up training at least 1 or 2 short-term just to help them & have fun. So tbh I guess I really don’t count as a “no sex before marriage” ChristianGiven that in Biblical times every girl would be married right after her first period, there’s really no precedent for this weird modern situation where so many young adults are unmarried. “No sex before marriage” was easy for girls…..back when they were already married before their teenage hormones kicked in Is polygamy legal where You’re located? |
|
|
Online now
| CotrolYourHole(dom male) |
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
Zelia wrote: CotrolYourHole wrote: SirsBabyDoll wrote: While polygamy is supported by multiple world religions, I can tell you that at least in Islam, there are conditions.
1) You have to be able to provide for each other the wives EQUALLY. That means mentally, emotionally, physically, quality time, AND financially. Keep in mind that even today, a woman was given an agreed upon "dowery" by the suitor and that COULD NOT be taken back. This was done in order to provide for the wife in the event that she became a widow. It was her's to do with as she pleases. It was mandated in order to care for the widows, orphans, and destitute during a period when many of the men had been killed during war. It was NOT simply for the purpose of getting extra pussy. 2) It was an ENM situation. If the first (or other) wives did not agree on the new addition, it was not allowed. In many, many cases, it was simply to provide protection and stability to women and children who would otherwise not have that. I am Muslim but for my own reasons, I cannot do polygamy or polyamory. Thanks for giving the Islamic perspective on this. I agree that there has to be a foundation of love & support for all wives involved. The Old Testament has regulations on it as well (can’t take 2 sisters because they will turn into rival wives, can’t take a mom & daughter, etc). I definitely agree that a polygamous marriage has to be much more than just a source of extra pussy for the man I know that I’d struggle to provide for 2 stay-at-home wives right now at age 26, so even though me & my wife want a 2nd wife (she likes both the homemaking help aspect, the more siblings for our kids aspect AND of course the threesome aspect since she’s bicurious) we will prob end up waiting till we’re in our 30s. Which is a bit of a bummer tbh, cause spiritually speaking I DO prefer to keep sex within the committed space of marriage, but there’s just so many beautiful & lonely young subs out there that we’re probably gonna end up training at least 1 or 2 short-term just to help them & have fun. So tbh I guess I really don’t count as a “no sex before marriage” ChristianGiven that in Biblical times every girl would be married right after her first period, there’s really no precedent for this weird modern situation where so many young adults are unmarried. “No sex before marriage” was easy for girls…..back when they were already married before their teenage hormones kicked inIs polygamy legal where You’re located? Nah the government doesn’t recognize poly marriages anywhere in the US I don’t think- def not in NC where I live. But since me & my wife don’t believe in marriage licenses that’s no problem to us haha  her family thought we were weird for not getting “legally” married but to us it’s just between us & the Creator, not the same goverment that promotes war, addiction & death everyday I’m not judging anyone who gets one, but just wasn’t for us- we got married so quick after meeting there wasn’t much time to plan a ceremony, get a license etc….we were similar to Genesis 24 where Isaac meets Rebekah and shortly after “took her into the tent, loved her, and she became his wife”. Except it was a month after meeting not that same night
My bad for typing a lot lol but this topic gets my mind going so to wrap it all together- technically from a legal perspective they would be considered my live-in subs/GFs not wives, but as long my wives & God know our relationship it’s cool with us
|
|
|
HEMI(dom male)
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
dollMaker wrote: The reformed denominations do not recognise the writings of the Apocrypha as inspired cannon scripture, following the Jewish Masoretic Text, therefore within bibles coming from that part of Christianity they are excluded. Judaism also does not recognise them as scripture … At what time in pre-Christian history was the Masoretic Text determined to be the only canon of scripture for the Jewish faith? dollMaker wrote: … though the translation into Greek made in ancient Alexandria, by 70 Hebrew scholars by order of Ptolemy II Philadelphus does include them. This is known as the Septuagint. The Orthodox tradition does view them as part of the bible because of this. Many in regards to Old Testament writings consider the Masoretic Text to be over all others in regards to accuracy and worth, so the Latin Vulgate and Septuagint are secondary sources, but are valuable. It does not logically follow that the Latin Vulgate and Septuagint are secondary sources simply because “(m)any … consider the Masoretic Text to be over all others in regards to accuracy and worth.” dollMaker wrote: There are those out there who view the excluding of books/writings as some sort of conspiracy to keep the ‘true bible’ from people, but the reality is simple, though the process to arrive at that point more complex. During the early periods of the formation of Christianity, the Church Fathers as they are known, debated the writings and their divine inspiration, many failed because it was very obvious that they lacked any divinity. Did the Protestant reformers possess the necessary divinity to correctly determine the canon of Christian scripture, or is there an inspired table-of-contents for Christian scripture? dollMaker wrote: It can easily be argued though, that the Church Fathers were not perfect in their process, after all among some rampant anti semitism was present, and replacement theology comes from this place. How is it that the alleged “rampant anti-semitism” and alleged “replacement theology” affected the determination of the canon of Christian scripture? |
|
|
|
Zelia
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
You are not legally married. Thank You for clarifying.
|
|
|
|
HEMI(dom male)
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
SirsBabyDoll wrote: What I found interesting in my research yesterday is the correlation between the Book of Tobias and the Apocrypha and Islamic teachings, such as Intercession and God hearing the prayers of the dead. For me, it means to pay attention. It is MY hypothesis that the different religions as well as the languages were created by God (for me, it is a singular God), at the Tower of Babel. When the people couldn't communicate with each other, they separated and went on their merry way. That included the religion teachers. Since no ONE person can know everything about any one topic, they depend on group knowledge and when that group knowledge was split, some information was inaccessible to the religions leaders, so, when they encountered an issue, they had to take a best guess that would be reasonable. To me, all the world religions used to be one religion. When I encounter "same teachings" from religion to religion", for me it means that THAT is the true teaching. The Council of Nicaea....how can a religion's holy scripture be "divinely inspired" if it can be debated and written off on a whim.  What specific canon of the Council of Nicaea reflects a debate regarding the Christian scripture? SirsBabyDoll wrote: I get the effort, but men and Man back then we're not known for their balanced, neutral, self-examination and honesty. They were power hungry, greedy bastards who had inflated egos. What is the basis for your statement, and if true, how did this consideration affect the canon of Christian scripture? |
|
|
| CotrolYourHole(dom male) |
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
Zelia wrote: You are not legally married. Thank You for clarifying.
No problem! |
|
|
obsequiae(dom male)
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
SirsBabyDoll wrote: 2) It was an ENM situation. If the first (or other) wives did not agree on the new addition, it was not allowed.
Polygamy in such a patriarchal setting can not usually be ethically non-monogamous (polyamorous) in my opinion, because the wife did not ever have the option of another relationship and voluntarily eschewed it in favor of her husband. Also this is just my two cents as an atheist/agnostic to the topic of the thread at large: It seems kind of silly to me that if a creator God exists, the notion he made good sex with someone you love feel so fulfilling both physically and emotionally, but asked us to abstain from it before a piece of paper is signed or a little ritual performed. But it's because again, this is man's invention. I'm sure some of it was practical (cutting down on STIs, more pregnancies than the family/town could sustain with regards to certain resources, etc. P.S. Purity culture is bullshit and checking for hymens is and always was weird. |
|
|
|
HEMI(dom male)
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
obsequiae wrote: Also this is just my two cents as an atheist/agnostic to the topic of the thread at large: It seems kind of silly to me that if a creator God exists, the notion he made good sex with someone you love feel so fulfilling both physically and emotionally, but asked us to abstain from it before a piece of paper is signed or a little ritual performed. It seems kind of silly to me that if a creator God exists, He could not hold mankind to a higher sexual standard than He does the beast in the field. obsequiae wrote: But it's because again, this is man's invention. How does this conclusion necessarily follow? |
|
|
SirsBabyDoll(sub female){Pizza+☕}
|
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
obsequiae wrote: SirsBabyDoll wrote: 2) It was an ENM situation. If the first (or other) wives did not agree on the new addition, it was not allowed.
Polygamy in such a patriarchal setting can not usually be ethically non-monogamous (polyamorous) in my opinion, because the wife did not ever have the option of another relationship and voluntarily eschewed it in favor of her husband. Also this is just my two cents as an atheist/agnostic to the topic of the thread at large: It seems kind of silly to me that if a creator God exists, the notion he made good sex with someone you love feel so fulfilling both physically and emotionally, but asked us to abstain from it before a piece of paper is signed or a little ritual performed. But it's because again, this is man's invention. I'm sure some of it was practical (cutting down on STIs, more pregnancies than the family/town could sustain with regards to certain resources, etc. P.S. Purity culture is bullshit and checking for hymens is and always was weird. In Islam, the mandate is about equity of time and resources. That is not saying that men and women were equal, far from it. Men had their duties and rights (within social systems) but so to did the women. Each PERSON had to deal equitably with everyone else. In modern times, if I'm assuming the countries that non-Muslims envision when they think of "Islam", those mandates have become distorted. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia being the one that springs to MY mind as being the leader and driver of that distortion. Just as we have 'Christian' based faiths today that distort the religion into their distorted view, so to with Islam, Judism, and Buddhism. Across the globe we see this in action. The Zionists in Israel, the military of Myrmar, the Wahabis of Saudi Arabia. All religious bases that have distorted the message and teachings of their respective faiths. But delving deeper into the teachings with an open mind and you will find where they have deviated. It just takes patience. Yes, in Islam, if the other wives do not agree with the presence of the others for whatever reason, and it could not be resolved, then the new addition was disallowed. If that meant divorce, then that was allowed as well...and he's, the husband HAD to continue to provide for the rejected wife for a set period of time. That's also why she was able to keep her Mahr (bride price), to help her in that event. |
|
|
| CotrolYourHole(dom male) |
1 year ago •
Oct 11, 2022
obsequiae wrote: SirsBabyDoll wrote: 2) It was an ENM situation. If the first (or other) wives did not agree on the new addition, it was not allowed.
Polygamy in such a patriarchal setting can not usually be ethically non-monogamous (polyamorous) in my opinion, because the wife did not ever have the option of another relationship and voluntarily eschewed it in favor of her husband. Also this is just my two cents as an atheist/agnostic to the topic of the thread at large: It seems kind of silly to me that if a creator God exists, the notion he made good sex with someone you love feel so fulfilling both physically and emotionally, but asked us to abstain from it before a piece of paper is signed or a little ritual performed. But it's because again, this is man's invention. I'm sure some of it was practical (cutting down on STIs, more pregnancies than the family/town could sustain with regards to certain resources, etc. P.S. Purity culture is bullshit and checking for hymens is and always was weird. I agree the piece of paper thing is silly too even as a Christian- that’s why taking her virginity was considered the moment she became your wife to the ancient Israelites. Modern purity culture IS bullshit for sure, when I was involved with charismatic/evangelical churches I saw the toxic role that telling full-grown men and women that their natural sexual desires were a sin or “spirit of lust” played in their lives. when the Bible clearly says celibacy is a spiritual gift that few people have. Most need to get married in their teens if lifetime monogamy or even committed polygamy is going to work for them. Why was virginity so important in traditional cultures? Because with no birth control, men were liable to get her pregnant very quickly so there needed to be an understanding that he would stick around for life so their children could have a father. The whole casual girlfriend/boyfriend dynamic didn’t exist until birth control existed of course- I’d say it’s had a negative effect on relationships but everyone’s entitled to their own opinion on that. A growing number of Christian women are choosing not to use BC so that’s part of why losing their virginity with their husband appeals to them. As for whether or not polygamous relationships are ethical, I think it depends on the people involved. Vanilla-minded people wouldn’t view a M/s or TPE relationship as ethical, but this site is full of people who are consensually & happily in those type of relationships. So if 2 women and 1 man want to have a 3-way relationship that only includes them and any other subs their Dom wants them to train, but no other men, that’s perfectly ethical to me. For ex my wife has no interest in fucking another guy, I’m the only guy she’s been with & it’s staying that way, but is open to playing with other girls. Relationships where the women are having sex with other men is polyamory not polygamy if I understand the definitions right, I’m not saying either is bad but polyamory is too open-ended for some folks. It’s been interesting to see different perspectives on this stuff- Christian, Atheist, Muslim & more. Much respect to everyone who’s commented
|
|
|