Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (421578)	7/1/2003 10:48:20 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Polygamy ordinarily refers to a type of marriage which is either legitimate or not. I marvel at this. You merely speak here of social convention, where I speak of nature’s obvious design. Call it what you will, the philosophical essence of polygamy is multiple humans binding themselves in sexual union. I merely cut to the chase, ignoring when polygamy becomes conventionally termed “polygamy” to get to the essential character of the relationship. (Dear me, Neo.) You are arguing that there is a reason not to legitimize it. I think I understood well enough. Merely having several women (or men) in a web of sexual relations is not equal to polygamy, because the marital relations and all that are entailed are not recognized. I don’t really give a hoot about when the relationship is socially “recognized.” The issue here is much much MUCH more fundamental than so trivial a fact. It is the essential polygamist relationship, call it what you will, that is under scrutiny here. We look at essential human character and DO NOT FIND polygamist schemes there at all. The essential biological character of man comes into being the very moment ONE male’s sperm fuses with ONE female’s ovum. That is our character. I am completely unconcerned with your legitimizing polygamy. Go right ahead and do it. My concern lies ONLY with the crime against humanity that is committed when you aim to force everyone to by default legitimize such perversions using the might of government. I am sorry, I find your account of these matters deeply unpersuasive. That is only because I have failed to clearly make the point or you are unable to understand it – or both. But the fact I have described yet remains in full force. It is found in your own flesh and it existed therein from the very moment of your conception. All things "Neocon" are predicated upon that heterosexual character. Indeed all humanity is predicated upon it. It, and none else, is us.