I already gave my reasons why plural marriage isn't a good idea. They're not the ones trying to push for plural marriage in the first place.But that's no reason to deny their relationships legal recognition!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I already gave my reasons why plural marriage isn't a good idea. They're not the ones trying to push for plural marriage in the first place.But that's no reason to deny their relationships legal recognition!
I already gave my reasons why plural marriage isn't a good idea. They're not the ones trying to push for plural marriage in the first place.
So if a Muslim rapes someone, for example, they are an atheist?
Yes since they didn't follow the message of Islam
You meant to aim this at Kirran?You're committing a No TrueMeScotsman fallacy here. You don't get to disavow a self-identified Muslim simply because they do something you don't like. Unless I'm mistaken, the Quran itself forbids Muslims from judging who is a worshipper of Allah - thus creating sectarian divides - so doing this makes you, ironically, a non-Muslim.
By your logic Muhammad wasn't a Muslim because he had a poet put to death for mocking him. Killing innocents is forbidden according to Islam, remember?
I don't really have any objection to polygamy and I am not a Muslim. What exactly is the objection to polygamy?The prophet Muhammad was a polygamist. Should there be laws that forbid Muslims from imitating their Prophet?
If you are a Muslim, you must have no objection to polygamy, right?because it was the practice of the Prophet whom God chose to bring the world the true Faith, it can't be a bad thing, right?
Yeah I always thought paul was at best out of place and at worst a false prophet who was trying to take away from the message of jesus and replace it with pure gibberish.Ah, now that verse is more appropriate to Christian thought.
But, to be fair, when I was Christian I just ignored Paul because I found him a repressive weirdo and hated how Christians quoted him more than the Gospels.
May I ask why?I'm against polygamy in general.
Because there tends to be inherent inequalities in it. I've never seen an example of plural relationships where everyone is really getting all their needs met - emotionally or otherwise. Someone nearly always ends up cheated in the end, if not outright used. There also tends to be a hierarchy within such relationships. Someone is favored over the others. It comes off as selfish, to me. Plus, it's a very privileged thing because who really has the time and other resources to invest in multiple relationships at the same time? A relationship with one person is enough work as it is.May I ask why?
Because there tends to be inherent inequalities in it. I've never seen an example of plural relationships where everyone is really getting all their needs met - emotionally or otherwise. Someone nearly always ends up cheated in the end, if not outright used. There also tends to be a hierarchy within such relationships. Someone is favored over the others. It comes off as selfish, to me. Plus, it's a very privileged thing because who really has the time and other resources to invest in multiple relationships at the same time? A relationship with one person is enough work as it is.
So monogamy is my ideal.
Yeah, people are going to do what they want in the end. But I personally don't encourage it. I know some people who do the open/poly relationship thing. In their case, they are hurting people, including a friend of mine and me in the past, and I don't wouldn't say that all such relationships are like that, but there's certain issues that seem built-in to them. In daily life, I tend to take a "live and let live" attitude while inwardly disagreeing with it.See the problem there is how can I have my harem. Think man THINK!
But no I do get what you mean and overall i'm not sure I would see the point in polygamy. If people want to do it that is another thing though.
Yeah, people are going to do what they want in the end. But I personally don't encourage it. I know some people who do the open/poly relationship thing. In their case, they are hurting people, including a friend of mine and me in the past, and I don't wouldn't say that all such relationships are like that, but there's certain issues that seem built-in to them. In daily life, I tend to take a "live and let live" attitude while inwardly disagreeing with it.
You meant to aim this at Kirran?
It's just not something I want to see encouraged, socially. Too many issues with it, imo. But that's my opinion.It's a fine line when the live and let live stops working. A dictatorship can be lovely when your dictator is lovely but it only lasts as long as the dictator themselves.
Kind of a side note but I really like the art in your signature.
You're committing a No TrueMeScotsman fallacy here. You don't get to disavow a self-identified Muslim's faith simply because they do something you don't like. Unless I'm mistaken, the Quran itself forbids Muslims from judging who is a worshipper of Allah - thus creating sectarian divides - so doing this makes you, ironically, a non-Muslim.
By your logic Muhammad wasn't a Muslim because he had a poet put to death for mocking him. Killing innocents is forbidden according to Islam, remember?