|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: who was incorrect? | |||
| The dealer, for not counting doew |
   
|
51 | 50.00% |
| Player A for not making hmself completely clear |
  
|
13 | 12.75% |
| Player B for not asking for areal count |
  
|
33 | 32.35% |
| Me for not giving the dealer on the job training |
  
|
5 | 4.90% |
| Voters: 102. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
03-02-2007, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
How many generations do we have to go back before it is "acceptable" and forgotten about by everyone?
|
|
#12
03-02-2007, 03:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Don't care about ancestors. Slavery was reasonable given the period's understanding of race based capacity for civilized behavior - which he we have only recently lost in deference to civil rights. Polygamy was not reasonable back in the day. Therefore, polygamy is more of an aberration, and probably more of a sign that something was wrong with their ancestors. [/ QUOTE ] Why was polygamy "not reasonable" long ago? It's one of the most common mating arrangements in the animal kingdom (if not the most common) and while humans may be above animals in capacity to reason and in terms of spiritual potential, that doesn't mean humans are above animals in the biological sense. Also, many cultures throughout history have utilized polygamy. How about them Turkish harems?!! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Some countries in the Middle East still allow polygamy today if I'm not mistaken. I'm just wondering how you are deriving the assessment of "reasonable" or "not reasonable". Given the moderately widespread utilization of polygamy throughout history amongst various cultures, I'm also wondering how you term it an aberration. If you could explain these things I'd be much obliged. Thanks, and thanks for reading my post. [/ QUOTE ] Mongamy is the aberration. It's a lot easier to keep women enslaved for several thousand years that way. [/ QUOTE ] While I don't think this is an issue at all, and that people should fornicate with whomever they want, that enslaved comment is doutbful. Polygamous relationships are very male dominated and often abusive, more so than monogamous ones IIRC. That structure doesn't create more equality, probably less.
|
|
#13
03-02-2007, 03:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Don't care about ancestors. Slavery was reasonable given the period's understanding of race based capacity for civilized behavior - which he we have only recently lost in deference to civil rights. Polygamy was not reasonable back in the day. Therefore, polygamy is more of an aberration, and probably more of a sign that something was wrong with their ancestors. [/ QUOTE ] Why was polygamy "not reasonable" long ago? It's one of the most common mating arrangements in the animal kingdom (if not the most common) and while humans may be above animals in capacity to reason and in terms of spiritual potential, that doesn't mean humans are above animals in the biological sense. Also, many cultures throughout history have utilized polygamy. How about them Turkish harems?!! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Some countries in the Middle East still allow polygamy today if I'm not mistaken. I'm just wondering how you are deriving the assessment of "reasonable" or "not reasonable". Given the moderately widespread utilization of polygamy throughout history amongst various cultures, I'm also wondering how you term it an aberration. If you could explain these things I'd be much obliged. Thanks, and thanks for reading my post. [/ QUOTE ] What does "moderately widespread" mean? Polygamy has not been accepted in an overwhelming majority of cultures, in particular Western/Christian cultures. If you took a poll in 1861 in the U.S. and asked people whether slavery should be outlawed versus polygamy being outlawed, polygamy would have won in a landslide. I think that whether your distant ancestors were slave owners versus polygamists should not be a story either way though. [/ QUOTE ] I agree that whether one's ancestors were polygamists, or slave-drivers, shouldn't be an issue as far as present-day political candidates are concerned. I'm just sort of wondering how the poster decided that back in the day, polygamy was unreasonable whereas slavery was reasonable.
|
|
#14
03-02-2007, 03:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
How many generations do we have to go back before it is "acceptable" and forgotten about by everyone? [/ QUOTE ] Well I would give the example of Mel Gibson, whose father is a holocaust denier. There is no way that someone whose immediate family had such extreme/politically unacceptable views could get ways from these issues and try to run for president.
|
|
#15
03-02-2007, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
While Obama's ancestors are irrelevant to his presidential bid, I have to admit that BGC blew my mind with the idea of a black guy's ancestors owning slaves. I think it puts the Affirmative Action and reparations debate in a new light.
|
|
#16
03-02-2007, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
Polygamy has not been accepted in an overwhelming majority of cultures, in particular Western/Christian cultures. [/ QUOTE ] Uhm, no. Maybe you mean ONLY in Western/Christian culture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy "According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook derived from George P. Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas recorded the marital composition of 1231 societies, from 1960-1980. Of these societies, 186 societies were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry."
|
|
#17
03-02-2007, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
While Obama's ancestors are irrelevant to his presidential bid, I have to admit that BGC blew my mind with the idea of a black guy's ancestors owning slaves. I think it puts the Affirmative Action and reparations debate in a new light. [/ QUOTE ] Even more remarkable that he would get reparations, with no slave ancestors, but only slaveholding ancestors! Rigged! Also, McCain and Edwards had ancestors that owned slaves.
|
|
#18
03-02-2007, 04:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
Polygamous relationships are very male dominated and often abusive, more so than monogamous ones IIRC. That structure doesn't create more equality, probably less. [/ QUOTE ] Evidence?
|
|
#19
03-02-2007, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
While Obama's ancestors are irrelevant to his presidential bid, I have to admit that BGC blew my mind with the idea of a black guy's ancestors owning slaves. I think it puts the Affirmative Action and reparations debate in a new light. [/ QUOTE ] Did you know that some black people actually owned slaves in the US?
|
|
#20
03-02-2007, 05:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Which is worse? Slave owning ancestors or polygamist ancestors?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] How many generations do we have to go back before it is "acceptable" and forgotten about by everyone? [/ QUOTE ] Well I would give the example of Mel Gibson, whose father is a holocaust denier. There is no way that someone whose immediate family had such extreme/politically unacceptable views could get ways from these issues and try to run for president. [/ QUOTE ] So what you are saying is one generation isn't enough. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
