Sign in to follow this  
Ditkaless Wonders

Three's more than just company

Recommended Posts

I am happily married to one woman. Best thing that ever happened to me and I wouldnt have it any other way. That's me, though, and its certainly not my place to tell anyone else how they should roll. If 2(or more) guys/gals are truly in love, happy together, and want their relationship to be legally recognized as a marriage, far be it from me to say they shouldnt be allowed. Doesnt change my marriage at all. My :2cents:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if I can get another guy to join my marriage. I see it as an everyother day thing with both of us having Sundays off to watch a game. Monday Wednesday and Friday I do the chores and he has the sexual access to her, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays he does the chores and I take the marital duty.

 

I'm not really man enough to handle one woman all by myself.

 

I figure the guy who does the chores also has to do the listening on those days since if I listen to her I don't feel like screwing her that same day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not an uncommon thing, but the people are usually really unattractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not an uncommon thing, but the people are usually really unattractive.

 

Have you seen that Showtime reality series on Polymary? This guy has a nice setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if I can get another guy to join my marriage. I see it as an everyother day thing with both of us having Sundays off to watch a game. Monday Wednesday and Friday I do the chores and he has the sexual access to her, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays he does the chores and I take the marital duty.

 

I'm not really man enough to handle one woman all by myself.

 

I figure the guy who does the chores also has to do the listening on those days since if I listen to her I don't feel like screwing her that same day.

 

 

So that would be two men only having sex once a month?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/31/world/americas/brazil-polyfaithful-union/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

 

O.K., a civil union of questionable legality, but interesting nonetheless. Is this going to be trend setting?

 

 

 

Hmmm. The polygamy/polyandry question is one I don't necessarily have an answer to - I support "gay marriage" (in quotes, since the best resolution I've ever seen is that churches should continue to do whatever they'd like, and gov't should get out of the "marriage" business and stick strictly to the "civil union" business - which is more or less semantics, but anything that keeps evangelicals in their bomb shelters is OK by me), so by the argument of "why shouldn't TWO consenting adults be able to enter into what is in many ways simply a legal contract?" there isn't much rebuttal to "why shouldn't two OR MORE consenting adults yadda yadda yadda?" - and I can't really come up with an objection.

 

 

Plus polygamous marriages are IN DA BIBLE (and the Torah and Koran and Book of Mormon) so it's got that going for it.

 

 

 

As an aside, there's a rather interesting take on possible permutations on polygamy in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='Chavez' timestamp='1346642342' post='3712585']

Hmmm. The polygamy/polyandry question is one I don't necessarily have an answer to - I support "gay marriage" (in quotes, since the best resolution I've ever seen is that churches should continue to do whatever they'd like, and gov't should get out of the "marriage" business and stick strictly to the "civil union" business - which is more or less semantics, but anything that keeps evangelicals in their bomb shelters is OK by me), so by the argument of "why shouldn't TWO consenting adults be able to enter into what is in many ways simply a legal contract?" there isn't much rebuttal to "why shouldn't two OR MORE consenting adults yadda yadda yadda?" - and I can't really come up with an objection.

 

 

Plus polygamous marriages are IN DA BIBLE (and the Torah and Koran and Book of Mormon) so it's got that going for it.

 

 

 

As an aside, there's a rather interesting take on possible permutations on polygamy in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

[/u]

 

 

I'm in agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. The polygamy/polyandry question is one I don't necessarily have an answer to - I support "gay marriage" (in quotes, since the best resolution I've ever seen is that churches should continue to do whatever they'd like, and gov't should get out of the "marriage" business and stick strictly to the "civil union" business - which is more or less semantics, but anything that keeps evangelicals in their bomb shelters is OK by me), so by the argument of "why shouldn't TWO consenting adults be able to enter into what is in many ways simply a legal contract?" there isn't much rebuttal to "why shouldn't two OR MORE consenting adults yadda yadda yadda?" - and I can't really come up with an objection.

 

Yep, and you better not come up with an objection, because then you'd be a bigot.

 

Also, if a man wants to marry a sheep, or a pony, or a '69 Camaro SS, you're a bigot if you object to that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yep, and you better not come up with an objection, because then you'd be a bigot.

 

Also, if a man wants to marry a sheep, or a pony, or a '69 Camaro SS, you're a bigot if you object to that too.

 

 

Don't be a f*cking idiot.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, and you better not come up with an objection, because then you'd be a bigot.

 

Also, if a man wants to marry a sheep, or a pony, or a '69 Camaro SS, you're a bigot if you object to that too.

 

 

You don't marry a pony, they are for on the side, you marry the sheep, but only if she is giving up the wool regularly. As for the camaro only a heathen would prefer the 69 to the 67.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. The polygamy/polyandry question is one I don't necessarily have an answer to - I support "gay marriage" (in quotes, since the best resolution I've ever seen is that churches should continue to do whatever they'd like, and gov't should get out of the "marriage" business and stick strictly to the "civil union" business - which is more or less semantics, but anything that keeps evangelicals in their bomb shelters is OK by me), so by the argument of "why shouldn't TWO consenting adults be able to enter into what is in many ways simply a legal contract?" there isn't much rebuttal to "why shouldn't two OR MORE consenting adults yadda yadda yadda?" - and I can't really come up with an objection.

 

 

Plus polygamous marriages are IN DA BIBLE (and the Torah and Koran and Book of Mormon) so it's got that going for it.

 

 

 

As an aside, there's a rather interesting take on possible permutations on polygamy in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

 

 

The Heinlein book's ideas were the first thing I thought of as well... :thinking: Who gives a flip? Why does one person think they should be able to control another (and that includes taking another person's money to pay for other people's stuff). :grabstorch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. The polygamy/polyandry question is one I don't necessarily have an answer to - I support "gay marriage" (in quotes, since the best resolution I've ever seen is that churches should continue to do whatever they'd like, and gov't should get out of the "marriage" business and stick strictly to the "civil union" business - which is more or less semantics, but anything that keeps evangelicals in their bomb shelters is OK by me), so by the argument of "why shouldn't TWO consenting adults be able to enter into what is in many ways simply a legal contract?" there isn't much rebuttal to "why shouldn't two OR MORE consenting adults yadda yadda yadda?" - and I can't really come up with an objection.

 

 

Plus polygamous marriages are IN DA BIBLE (and the Torah and Koran and Book of Mormon) so it's got that going for it.

 

 

 

As an aside, there's a rather interesting take on possible permutations on polygamy in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

 

 

it's kind of interesting too that the people who adhere to and practice polygamy aren't even asking for legal recognition of their "marriages" -- their legal fight is simply to avoid being put in jail and/or forcibily split up. that's one important thing the gheys don't have to deal with, at least not anymore.

 

I favor the "two consenting adults" bar for legal recognition, myself. but whererver legal recognition ends should NOT be where persecution and prosecution pick up, and in a way that's an even bigger deal than whether the law recognizes your "marriage" as an official marriage.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for the camaro only a heathen would prefer the 69 to the 67.

 

 

I'd marry any 67-69 Camaro that looked decent. I'd stick in the tailpipe of a Camaro with the race 302 engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd marry any 67-69 Camaro that looked decent. I'd stick in the tailpipe of a Camaro with the race 302 engine.

 

 

That's only the '68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Heinlein book's ideas were the first thing I thought of as well... :thinking:

 

 

I knew I liked you for a reason, and that reason certainly isn't your spelling/grammar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The institution of family cannot be defended with the approval of actions that seek to distort its definition," the religious, conservative Plinio Correa de Oliveira Institute said in a statement. "The purpose of this (union) is not to build families, but to destroy them."

 

That's the same thing many conservatives say about gay marriage. Interesting that based on what the article says, gay marriage is legal there. ("Brazilian law defines marriage as a union between two people, so it is impossible for a civil union of three to be granted the rights of a marriage of two.")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't marry a pony, they are for on the side, you marry the sheep, but only if she is giving up the wool regularly. As for the camaro only a heathen would prefer the 69 to the 67.

 

 

Once again, DW demonstrates his almost Darkman-like automotive acumen. One would normally have to watch "My Cousin Vinny" to see such a raw display of automotive gray matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.