Originally Posted by
toads
it's something that works in certain countries because they have societal rules which support or uphold their belief system, our society is so flakey and pretty much godless now, that nothing really surprises me any more
I had come to the conclusion a long time ago, that each of us is being groomed in some sort of social engineering experiment, to see how much shit we are prepared to go along with.
NZers must be the most complacent and passive nation on earth, we seem to bend over and take it up the proverbial indefinately.
I really couldn't give a shit to be honest, most of us know right from wrong, and most of us know how to get along with other people, what really pisses me off is when laws are made to tell us what is right and wrong in the arena of human relationships, we have all gotten along quite nicely to date without bigamy being legal, why change it! Why even think about whether the law needs to change, why not instead ,consider, whether we need to pay people to think up new laws for us at all!
Some points to ponder:
1 If it works in some countries, then it is not a universal moral imperative, but just a custom. Customs change, historically and geographically. Who's to say what is right and what is wrong?
2 Whether a society is "godless" or not is irrelevant. Societies in which bigamy/polygamy is legal tend to be those operating under a fairly strict theocratic regime (i.e. Islam, some Mormon sects), so "godlessness" is not the issue.
3 "Social engineering" is a sneer phrase used by people opposed to a particular direction in which society is changing (or being made to change). Imposition of a strict code of behaviour based on fundamentalist religious principles would also be "social engineering". The abolition of slavery, the outlawing of child labour and the introduction of equal rights for women were "social engineering". "How much shit we are prepared to go along with" is a phrase that might easily have fallen from the lips of anti-abolitionists, opponents of women's suffrage and others dismayed by the upheaval of their cosy world...
4 The complacency and passivity that you criticise could just as easily be praised as tolerance and acceptance...
5 If most of us know right from wrong, the only way you can explain the intense debate over burning moral issues (abortion, gay rights, euthanasia etc) is to suppose a vocal but misguided or devious minority successfully deceiving the right-thinking majority with specious arguments. No doubt there are many that will willingly subscribe to this conspiracy theory, but I would remind you again that exactly the same type of debate has occurred over the centuries in connection with the great social questions I mentioned in paragraph 3 above, not to mention the divine right of kings, universal suffrage, racial segregation and so on.
6 The law relating to bigamy, like most laws regulating sexual behaviour and family relationships, can be traced historically to patriarchal attitudes specifically to do with inheritance of property. The moral dimension was a later superimposition. Who, apart from those who base their morality solely on scriptural authority, can say that bigamy or polygamy is intrinsically morally wrong? Who suffers if all parties are willing?
Free your mind, Toads!
Age is too high a price to pay for maturity
Reply With Quote
Blast From The Past Axis of Oil
Bookmarks