Southern_Man 0 #51 May 10, 2012 QuoteQuote And supposedly we have no shortage of 30+ or 40 yo women out there who really want to get married. . You should look at the 55+ demographics! And they no longer worry about pregnancy. In Ben Franklin's famous words about older women, "They don't tell, they don't swell and they are grateful as hell.""What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #52 May 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteSorry, I thought it was decided. Most religious people with the exception of some Mormons think polygamy is bad and most non-religious people think it's OK. But why? The patriarch of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was a polygynist. So were King David (beloved of God), Solomon and others. Krishna had over 16k wives. Budhism has no problem with it... QuoteI'm curious about views on here. Again, I apologize. I thought you were soliciting the views of people on this website. He was. How you answered a question about marrying multiple humans with a question about sex with animals is not entirely clear to some of us. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #53 May 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteI'm not sure what the fairest tax treatment would be. Maybe brackets, exemptions, deductions, and limits set to n x a single person's regardless of the number of adults. it's easy - each individual files a single tax form for themselves regardless of marital status and everybody follows the same tables and rules get the government completely out of it Or possibly this family group could incorporate, and pay tax as a corporation. After all, SCOTUS has declared that corporations are people.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #54 May 10, 2012 Quote I don't know about being a problem if we permit polygamy but this is a huge problem in societies that practice sex selective abortions such as China and India. The sex ratio in China is all out of whack. Unfortunately one way for the state to relieve pressure caused by a large contingent of sexually frustrated males is to send them to war. The governments buy food for people who can't feed themselves, subsidize apartments for people who can't house themselves, and provide medical care for those unable to afford it. It wouldn't be a big stretch to provide government brothels for people unable to meet and mary mates of their own. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #55 May 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm not sure what the fairest tax treatment would be. Maybe brackets, exemptions, deductions, and limits set to n x a single person's regardless of the number of adults. it's easy - each individual files a single tax form for themselves regardless of marital status and everybody follows the same tables and rules get the government completely out of it Or possibly this family group could incorporate, and pay tax as a corporation. After all, SCOTUS has declared that corporations are people. that's moving the wrong direction - even when thrown out tongue in cheek ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #56 May 10, 2012 The polygamy rate would go down dramatically if we stopped giving them Government funds. http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/05/how-polygamy-affects-your-wallet.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #57 May 10, 2012 QuoteSigh...asked a serious question....monkey lover showed up and derailed it. 'what if a monkey flew out of my butt? could I have sex with it? Would that be homosexual since it involved my ass?' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
