(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Just admit you're wrong Dix and move on....it's ok to be wrong fyi.[/b]

(09-03-2014 08:53 AM)Doctor Krieger Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Just admit you're wrong Dix and move on....it's ok to be wrong fyi.[/b]

He isn't wrong. Every time we drill down into an age of consent debate, all the libs, libertarians, and gays want it lowered or eliminated.

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 04:01 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 03:54 PM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 01:42 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  exactly, and when some fringe group wants to marry children and animals you'll totally be ok with that. Who are we to object?

I don't think you got the point I was trying to make. If I can go out and find 3 willing women I can live with them, have kids with them, and the law won't bother me. Only if I marry them does the law have a problem. Seems arbitrary to me.
I don't think marriage between consenting adults is comparable to child and animal abuse.

Why would that be child abuse if they are consenting? Do you decide what is child abuse? So if man and can find a consenting 9 year old to live with you'd be ok with that because only the law would say it is wrong?

What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

(09-03-2014 08:18 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 11:12 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 10:51 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 10:29 AM)fsquid Wrote:  I have to say that I don't understand why I should give a ****. Maybe someone can explain it.

Because it's another fragment in our culture and another shot at traditional marriage. This is the kind of stuff that creates societal breakdowns.

"In a society where everything goes, everything eventually does."

Historically speaking nothing is more traditional than polygamy. It's just not socially acceptable in this day of age. Personally, I'm struggling finding a wife, let alone two.

It's almost like you are repeating a talking point.

Talking point... WHAT??? I'm just stating a historical fact and even biblical fact. And also stating it's not socially acceptable today. I don't know how anyone can handle 15+ wives. Defies logic to expect someone to manage that many wives in a nonagricultural society.

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:53 AM)Doctor Krieger Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Just admit you're wrong Dix and move on....it's ok to be wrong fyi.[/b]

He isn't wrong. Every time we drill down into an age of consent debate, all the libs, libertarians, and gays want it lowered or eliminated.

Eh, I'd call myself libertarianish, and I think it's fine the way it is between 16 and 18. Who are all of these people you're referring to anyways? Just some imaginary friends?

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 04:01 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 03:54 PM)bearcat65 Wrote:  I don't think you got the point I was trying to make. If I can go out and find 3 willing women I can live with them, have kids with them, and the law won't bother me. Only if I marry them does the law have a problem. Seems arbitrary to me.
I don't think marriage between consenting adults is comparable to child and animal abuse.

Why would that be child abuse if they are consenting? Do you decide what is child abuse? So if man and can find a consenting 9 year old to live with you'd be ok with that because only the law would say it is wrong?

What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

all that has to be changed is a law. Nothing more.

(09-03-2014 08:56 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:18 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 11:12 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 10:51 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 10:29 AM)fsquid Wrote:  I have to say that I don't understand why I should give a ****. Maybe someone can explain it.

Because it's another fragment in our culture and another shot at traditional marriage. This is the kind of stuff that creates societal breakdowns.

"In a society where everything goes, everything eventually does."

Historically speaking nothing is more traditional than polygamy. It's just not socially acceptable in this day of age. Personally, I'm struggling finding a wife, let alone two.

It's almost like you are repeating a talking point.

Talking point... WHAT??? I'm just stating a historical fact and even biblical fact. And also stating it's not socially acceptable today. I don't know how anyone can handle 15+ wives. Defies logic to expect someone to manage that many wives in a nonagricultural society.

We don't live in 400 AD.

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 04:01 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 03:54 PM)bearcat65 Wrote:  I don't think you got the point I was trying to make. If I can go out and find 3 willing women I can live with them, have kids with them, and the law won't bother me. Only if I marry them does the law have a problem. Seems arbitrary to me.
I don't think marriage between consenting adults is comparable to child and animal abuse.

Why would that be child abuse if they are consenting? Do you decide what is child abuse? So if man and can find a consenting 9 year old to live with you'd be ok with that because only the law would say it is wrong?

What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

What difference does it make? The age of consent can change with a phone and a pen, a leftist legislature, or a rouge judge and the homosexual lobby is working hard for access to the children. The polygamists don't really have a lobby, but they would also like to see the age of consent done away with. Those fundamentalist LDS combines routinely marry off young girls to their elders.

I'm not sure which libertarians he knows that want age of consent reduced. I think somewhere between 16-18 is legit, as do most others I know.

Since we are obviously not using marriage norms that were OK in biblical times, as they are obviously outdated per Mr. Dixie, then I don't understand why we have to use the norms regarding 1 man, 1 woman. He obviously doesn't approve of what those in the bible did.

(09-03-2014 09:27 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  I'm not sure which libertarians he knows that want age of consent reduced. I think somewhere between 16-18 is legit, as do most others I know.

Since we are obviously not using marriage norms that were OK in biblical times, as they are obviously outdated per Mr. Dixie, then I don't understand why we have to use the norms regarding 1 man, 1 woman. He obviously doesn't approve of what those in the bible did.

It is in the libertarian party platform:

Quote:NEW POSITIVE LIBERTARIAN PARTY PLATFORM

1. Repeal Laws Giving Government Ownership over Individuals
We oppose the issuance by the government of an identity card, to be required for any purpose, such as employment, voting, or border crossing. We further oppose the use of the Social Security Number as a government-imposed personal identification code. We favor abolition of state laws setting specific legal age of consent or age of maturity.

(09-03-2014 09:05 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 04:01 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Why would that be child abuse if they are consenting? Do you decide what is child abuse? So if man and can find a consenting 9 year old to live with you'd be ok with that because only the law would say it is wrong?

What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

What difference does it make? The age of consent can change with a phone and a pen, a leftist legislature, or a rouge judge and the homosexual lobby is working hard for access to the children. The polygamists don't really have a lobby, but they would also like to see the age of consent done away with. Those fundamentalist LDS combines routinely marry off young girls to their elders.

I'm not a liberal nor do I favor lowering the age of consent. I don't think a man who wants more than one wife should be a criminal anymore than if a man has multiple girlfriends living with him. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I may not agree with the lifestyle nor want it for myself but I have no right to impose my morals on someone who chooses that lifestyle.

(09-02-2014 05:01 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  That's an incredible, pretty much Olympic level leap in judgement but I have seen enough threads derailed by you to know that once you have your mind made up on something then it doesn't matter what else is said you will maintain your stance. I happen to not live with a tinfoil hat on, I don't see ulterior motives behind every move, and I evidently have a hell of a lot more faith in my fellow man than you do.

(09-03-2014 09:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:27 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  I'm not sure which libertarians he knows that want age of consent reduced. I think somewhere between 16-18 is legit, as do most others I know.

Since we are obviously not using marriage norms that were OK in biblical times, as they are obviously outdated per Mr. Dixie, then I don't understand why we have to use the norms regarding 1 man, 1 woman. He obviously doesn't approve of what those in the bible did.

It is in the libertarian party platform:

Quote:NEW POSITIVE LIBERTARIAN PARTY PLATFORM

1. Repeal Laws Giving Government Ownership over Individuals
We oppose the issuance by the government of an identity card, to be required for any purpose, such as employment, voting, or border crossing. We further oppose the use of the Social Security Number as a government-imposed personal identification code. We favor abolition of state laws setting specific legal age of consent or age of maturity.

Please provide your source, as the platform adopted in June of 2014 does not have the passage your reference.

http://www.lp.org/platform

Consenting adults however, are mentioned.

Hate to make this point, but if it had been allowed all over the US for the last century our declining birth rate would not be such a bad thing.
As to handling 10 or 15 wives, would think you would appoint the legally first married wife as the Czar of Wives. Let her deal with it, her basically only job to direct the other worker bees. Have her tell them to get jobs and Show Me The Money!

(09-03-2014 09:38 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:05 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:42 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  What part of consenting adults are you not grasping? I'm not arguing over the law against statutory rape. I'm saying if a man is foolish enough to want more than one wife and all are consenting adults then why should it be against the law?

If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

What difference does it make? The age of consent can change with a phone and a pen, a leftist legislature, or a rouge judge and the homosexual lobby is working hard for access to the children. The polygamists don't really have a lobby, but they would also like to see the age of consent done away with. Those fundamentalist LDS combines routinely marry off young girls to their elders.

I'm not a liberal nor do I favor lowering the age of consent. I don't think a man who wants more than one wife should be a criminal anymore than if a man has multiple girlfriends living with him. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I may not agree with the lifestyle nor want it for myself but I have no right to impose my morals on someone who chooses that lifestyle.

So what if I don't want it to be a criminal act if a man wants to date his 12 year old niece?

(09-03-2014 09:45 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Hate to make this point, but if it had been allowed all over the US for the last century our declining birth rate would not be such a bad thing.
As to handling 10 or 15 wives, would think you would appoint the legally first married wife as the Czar of Wives. Let her deal with it, her basically only job to direct the other worker bees. Have her tell them to get jobs and Show Me The Money!

So you think the polygamous lifestyle produces a healthier family unit, or is birthrates the main objective?

(09-03-2014 09:50 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:38 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:05 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:44 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  If a man wants to date his 12 year old niece and she agrees, why should it be against the law?

Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

What difference does it make? The age of consent can change with a phone and a pen, a leftist legislature, or a rouge judge and the homosexual lobby is working hard for access to the children. The polygamists don't really have a lobby, but they would also like to see the age of consent done away with. Those fundamentalist LDS combines routinely marry off young girls to their elders.

I'm not a liberal nor do I favor lowering the age of consent. I don't think a man who wants more than one wife should be a criminal anymore than if a man has multiple girlfriends living with him. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I may not agree with the lifestyle nor want it for myself but I have no right to impose my morals on someone who chooses that lifestyle.

So what if I don't want it to be a criminal act if a man wants to date his 12 year old niece?

That has nothing to do with plural marriage between consenting adults.

(09-03-2014 09:58 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:50 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:38 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 09:05 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 08:55 AM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Because of the Age Of Consent. 12 years old is not an age of consent. If you make it so, there are other implications that would need to be thought through.
There is a deeper set of decision in changing the Age of Consent than there is to Polygamy. If you don't grasp that, well, maybe you need to think a little bit more

What difference does it make? The age of consent can change with a phone and a pen, a leftist legislature, or a rouge judge and the homosexual lobby is working hard for access to the children. The polygamists don't really have a lobby, but they would also like to see the age of consent done away with. Those fundamentalist LDS combines routinely marry off young girls to their elders.

I'm not a liberal nor do I favor lowering the age of consent. I don't think a man who wants more than one wife should be a criminal anymore than if a man has multiple girlfriends living with him. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I may not agree with the lifestyle nor want it for myself but I have no right to impose my morals on someone who chooses that lifestyle.

So what if I don't want it to be a criminal act if a man wants to date his 12 year old niece?

That has nothing to do with plural marriage between consenting adults.

Sure it does. Can a 12 year old not consent to a relationship with her 45 year old uncle?

bearcat65, just give up now. No matter how many facts you throw in Okla's face... no matter how much logic you use that makes sense to everyone here, it won't ever change Okla's mind. He will never agree to anything that is outside of his opinion. Just face it and ignore his posts like most everyone else here, including the far right conservatives.

(09-03-2014 10:14 AM)mlb Wrote:  bearcat65, just give up now. No matter how many facts you throw in Okla's face... no matter how much logic you use that makes sense to everyone here, it won't ever change Okla's mind. He will never agree to anything that is outside of his opinion. Just face it and ignore his posts like most everyone else here, including the far right conservatives.

Telling another poster to pick up his ball and go home?

I'm not changing the parameters of this argument so I can win. I have remained consistent. It is not me who is playing dodge ball.