DiscussMormonism.com

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... EJAwcJlDFo

For your discussion

They've got to do something to draw back those missing millions.

The piece begins by describing it as "a three-way civil union", one man and two women. That suggests not that the two women are each simply married to the man, but that the two women are married to each other also. For example, if the man dies, the two women would yet remain married to one another. So, this type of 'polyfidelitous union' could be considered a ménage à trois marriage.

That's a bit different than Mormon polygamy where the multiple wives are 'sister wives' to each other. There, the man dies and there would be not marriage bond remaining between the two women. Each is rendered single by reason of the man's death. They are 'sisters' in the sense that they each have a similar relationship with one and the same man.

It could be that Brazil has raised the bid. I wonder if JSJr and BY would call that raise, or fold.

I think it is acknowledging the obvious. I have always believed that any woman who would willingly enter into a polygamous union is probably bi-sexual, at the least.

Whether they will raise or fold is a good question.

MCB wrote:I think it is acknowledging the obvious. I have always believed that any woman who would willingly enter into a polygamous union is probably bi-sexual, at the least.

Whether they will raise or fold is a good question.

I don't have near the objection to a three-way marriage as I do to a polygamous arrangement where only the hub is married to and has relations with each spoke, but the spokes never intertwine.

sock puppet wrote:The piece begins by describing it as "a three-way civil union", one man and two women. That suggests not that the two women are each simply married to the man, but that the two women are married to each other also. For example, if the man dies, the two women would yet remain married to one another. So, this type of 'polyfidelitous union' could be considered a ménage à trois marriage.

That's a bit different than Mormon polygamy where the multiple wives are 'sister wives' to each other. There, the man dies and there would be not marriage bond remaining between the two women. Each is rendered single by reason of the man's death. They are 'sisters' in the sense that they each have a similar relationship with one and the same man.

It could be that Brazil has raised the bid. I wonder if JSJr and BY would call that raise, or fold.

I wonder if this will create a second exodus? Maybe the leaders will rally the members to build handcarts and trek to the new Zion in the amazon basin.

More recently, President Gordon B. Hinckley has reiterated that plural marriage is “against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows [the practice of a man having more than one wife], the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage” (“What Are People Asking about Us?” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 72).

The Church isn't going to reverse the reversal....is it?

So when will Kevin Graham be sending out wedding announcements?

bcspace wrote:So when will Kevin Graham be sending out wedding announcements?

Your accusation that Kevin's wife is bisexual is disgraceful and clearly out of bounds for this discussion board.

You have gone way over the line here.

So when will Kevin Graham be sending out wedding announcements?

Your accusation that Kevin's wife is bisexual is disgraceful and clearly out of bounds for this discussion board.

You have gone way over the line here.

I made no such accusation. Such an implication was made outside the OP. I merely responded to the notion of plural marriage. Take a 'lude, relax, and see my thread on being easily offended.