BlackPhx
Posts: 3432
Joined: 11/8/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LATEXBABY64 why has it always been one king one queen hummm in ever rule of some kind why is this so unless your arabic which they never seem to know Ummm LB... First Kings 11:1-3 indicates that King Solomon had 700 hundred wives and 300 hundred concubines and he wasn't the only King to do so, though I will admit the Man must have had some staying power to keep them all happy. But that is only an example, Egyptians, Romans, Africans and even South and North American Indians (some tribes) had more than one female or male as an intimate part of the family. For the right of succession only the children of the first wife might be recognized but there are very few Royal lines that do not have "bastard" children as a part of them and in fact in the past these children have been appointed Noble men, or in the line of succession where the Queen cannot produce an heir. That argument does not hold water. In actuality in cultures where the mortality rate of children and women in child birth is high, polygamy tends to be the primary way they ensure that there is continuity in the rearing of the children and a continuance of the genes. Polygamous households are not easy, any more than monogamous ones are, but, there is always someone to lend a shoulder, an ear, to comfort or present an alternate point of view, where in a monogamous household that support is often found not in the in-laws and parents of the people involved, but in the hands of therapist, shrinks, or clergy and being outside where they can't see the dynamics on a daily basis, all too often they can only go by the 1/10 that the people involved share. What are the statistics on a polygamous family breaking up? Not a clue as they are illegal as far as legal marriage is concerned in this country, but that does not stop them from occurring. For those involved in them that desire to be there, they are just as valid and happy as any monogamous relationship. poenkitten
|