taahviya chapman
Sort of the similar right ? See below.
Look at the harm it does. UK shares in Active White supremacy laws in 2022.
-“Virginia Woman Murders Cheating Boyfriend On Instagram!!”
https://mtonews.com/virginia-woman-murders-cheating-boyfriend-on-instagram-graphic-video
-leading cause of family breakups infidelity (59.6%)
-hundred of years of culture, family & relations problems complete with cutting off life.
You realize bad things happen from being against it in many ways.
See below.
Active White supremacy laws in 2022. Can you believe it.. White supremacy is alive in the government in 2022 with current laws, blocking and marking this email as spam is just one example of the enemies tactics. Lawmakers in all 50 states and other Government personal including Judges and Supreme court Judges, Governors Staff, Attorney General’s and Districts Attorneys in some states have received this email last year not to mention similar content emails with this truth over the last few years. 2020, 2021 and 2022. In hopes they will fix the laws.
Is anti polygyny really about the Females?
American white(European) supremacy is anti all other. Set the people free from unjust marriage laws.
Do 2022 present day lawmakers realize America is not all European American people.
Other people include:
-African Americans
-Spanish Americans (Hispanic)
-Native Americans
-Indian Americans (Asian Indian)
-Asian Americans
-Middle Eastern Americans and more…Have you looked around yet ?
Is it fair to force all Americans into European marriage customs ? Should all European Americans be forced into African Americans marriage customs ? What about Native Americans marriage customs ?.
While pro polygyny laws would not stop the rights of those who abide by Monogamy views such as the Roman Catholic organization. Forced anti polygyny laws stop the rights of others. Which is biased and discriminating against people outside the Roman Catholic Organization.
Just another day of American white (European) supremacy.
Drowning in bias – white supremacy
Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890), was a United States Supreme Court case affirming, by a 9–0 vote, that federal laws against polygamy did not conflict with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Davis v. Beason Chief Justice & Associate Justices – white European Americans ?
Reynolds v. United States Chief Justice & Associate Justices – white European Americans ?
Late Corp. of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States Chief Justice & Associate Justices – white European Americans ?
If you added a middle east Arab Muslim or African to the supreme court in that day would the outcome be different. Would they have said polygyny was not moral ?)
If the Supreme Court took a polygyny case today it would have a much different result now that American is more diverse 2021 in other culture besides European.
(Grover Cleveland, Born to a Presbyterian minister and his wife).
In President Grover Cleveland’s annual address to Congress in December 1885, he emotionally discussed the issue of polygamy in Utah:
The strength, the perpetuity, and the destiny of the nation rest upon our homes, established by the law of God, guarded by parental care, regulated by parental authority, and sanctified by parental love.
These are not the homes of polygamy. . . .
There is no feature of this practice or the system which sanctions it which is not opposed to all that is of value in our institutions.
There should be no relaxation in the firm but just execution of the law now in operation, and I should be glad to approve such further discreet legislation as will rid the country of this blot upon its fair fame.
Since the people upholding polygamy in our Territories are reenforced by immigration from other lands, I recommend that a law be passed to prevent the importation of Mormons into the country.
The Act was passed by the Senate in January 1886 by a vote of 38–7. It was passed by the House via a voice vote in January 1887. President Cleveland refused to sign the bill but did not veto it, which meant that the Act became law on March 3, 1887.
Justice Field, writing for the Court, condemned polygamy, writing that “Few crimes are more pernicious to the best interests of society, and receive more general or more deserved punishment.” He went on to echo Reynolds v. United States (1878): “However free the exercise of religion may be, it must be subordinate to the criminal laws of the country, passed with reference to actions regarded by general consent as properly the subjects of punitive legislation.” He wrote by way of comparison that if a religious sect advocated fornication or human sacrifice, “swift punishment would follow the carrying into effect of its doctrines, and no heed would be given to the pretense that, as religious beliefs, their supporters could be protected in their exercise by the Constitution of the United States.”
2003 U.S. Supreme Court was against U.S. Supreme Court justice — Stephen Johnson Field (November 4, 1816 – April 9, 1899) Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that sanctions of criminal punishment for those who commit sodomy are unconstitutional. The Court based its ruling on the notions of personal autonomy to define one’s own relationships and of American traditions of non-interference with private sexual decisions between consenting adults.
Interesting is that forced monogamy teaching is of Roman Catholic/Christian – European doctrines. FYI not from the bible – Information near bottom of article.
If you took the Religious Catholic/Christian Anti Polygyny movement out of history would you be pro polygyny today ?
DEARLY beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this Man and this Woman in holy Matrimony; which is an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man’s innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his …
Solemnization of Matrimony — Book of Common Prayer
START – Roman empire law which banned polygyny
Under the Romans, polygamy was legal until the Christians gained control in the reign of Constantine. The first Roman law forbidding polygamy was by that emperor made in 320 AD, stating: “No married man may have a concubine during the existence of his marriage.” In this law the term “concubine” refers to wife by usus, not to a slave. Usus normally required a written legal contract and the wife was a legal, freeborn wife. In Roman society a usus wife was just as legal as the primary wife. Originally, Romans had several different grades of wife and it was common for wealthy men to have all grades. This gradually devolved into having a primary wife and various usus wives. This does not include sex with slaves who were not considered any kind of wife. Roman law provided for what we now call “common law” wives, meaning automatic usus status even without a contract if the woman slept in the man’s house for over one year. The Twelve Tables specifically states the terms of this law as follows:
“If a wife should sleep for three nights in a year out of her husband’s house, she should not be subject to his paternal power.”
Thus any woman could escape being an automatic wife by claiming she slept for three nights outside of the house. Note that any usus wife, contract or not, would be considered materfamilias (primary wife) by the law if she was the only wife of a man. https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/23510/when-did-monogamy-become-the-norm-in-ancient-greece
The Roman Catholic Church considers the practice to be an offense against the dignity of marriage and in opposition to the religion’s moral values.The Council of Trent was held in several sessions from 1545 to 1563
“I am responding on behalf of Bishop Soto. Thank you for your email regarding monogamy and polygamy.
Catholic tradition has consistently interpreted Christ’s teaching as absolutely forbidding polygamy, and the prohibition was defined by the Council of Trent, pronouncing anathema against anyone who says that “it is lawful for Christians to have several wives at the same time, and that it is not forbidden by any divine law” (Denzinger 1802).
Respectfully,
Uli Schmitt
Director
Office of Clergy Coordination and Formation
Catholic Diocese of Sacramento
Tel.: 916-733-0245
Fax: 916-733-0215
Email: uschmitt@scd.org “
“Although the Court agreed with Reynolds that the free exercise of religion underlay the founding of the United States, it also held that government officials have a right to regulate behavior as part of religious practices that are considered odious and violate basic notions of morality. Until the inception of the Mormon Church, the Court noted, the northern and western nations of Europe and every state had criminalized polygamy. “
Anti Polygyny violate basic notions of morality is just American white supremacy with morality based on Roman Catholic Christians teaching. Fit that in context to other places in the world and you have the same issue.
The United States and Europe have enacted the Anti polygyny laws steming from the Rome empire/Roman catholic (no separation of church and state). which dominated Europe which the settlers brought to America. Other nations arond the world which enacted Anti Polygyny laws have been influenced by Europe / Roman empire / Catholic views.
Protestantism, Christian religious movement that began in northern Europe in the early 16th century as a reaction to medieval Roman Catholic doctrines and practices. Along with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism became one of three major forces in Christianity. Still carried for the most part Anti polygyny Catholic views, that is why in most church meetings they are anti polygyny.
Kings and Queens of England & Britain – Did religions influence them and if so what were the religions ?
“RICHARD I (The Lionheart) 1189 – 1199
Richard was the third son of Henry II. By the age of 16, he was leading his own army putting down rebellions in France. Although crowned King of England, Richard spent all but 6 months of his reign abroad, preferring to use the taxes from his kingdom to fund his various armies and military ventures. He was the leading Christian commander during the Third Crusade.“
READ MORE https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/KingsQueensofBritain/
“The Third Crusade (1189–1192) was an attempt by three European monarchs of Western Christianity (Philip II of France, Richard I of England and Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor) to reconquer the Holy Land following the capture of Jerusalem by the Ayyubid sultan Saladin in 1187. For this reason, the Third Crusade is also known as the Kings’ Crusade.” READ MORE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Crusade
History of the Church of England
“Christianity arrived in the British Isles around AD 47 during the Roman Empire according to Gildas’s De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Church_of_England
Holy Roman Empire giving the PASTOR – bishop both civil and ecclesiastical powers
- “Territories ruled by a hereditary nobleman, such as a prince, archduke, duke, or count.
- Territories in which secular authority was held by an ecclesiastical dignitary, such as an archbishop, bishop, or abbot. Such an ecclesiastic or Churchman was a prince of the Church. In the common case of a prince-bishop, this temporal territory (called a prince-bishopric) frequently overlapped with his often larger ecclesiastical diocese, giving the bishop both civil and ecclesiastical powers. Examples are the prince-archbishoprics of Cologne, Trier, and Mainz.”
“Kings often employed bishops in administrative affairs and often determined who would be appointed to ecclesiastical offices”
“The Holy Roman Empire was neither a centralized state nor a nation-state. Instead, it was divided into dozens – eventually hundreds – of individual entities governed by kings, dukes, counts, bishops, abbots, and other rulers, collectively known as princes. There were also some areas ruled directly by the Emperor. At no time could the Emperor simply issue decrees and govern autonomously over the Empire. His power was severely restricted by the various local leaders.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
If you insist
If you insist forced monogamy is not of Catholic origins and that makes it non religious, which “justifies” the non religious anti polygyny stand.
The Romans and Greeks had beliefs & gods before Rome making the official religion Catholic. Also FYI Christmas is built around pre Roman Catholic / Christian ideas, December 25 was a pagan god day and Jews place Jesus’ birthday on another day. No different than a Nazi using the swastik symbol which did not originate from them.
It should be of no surprise why most of Europe considers monogamy the norm. Catholic / Christian taught anti polygyny views. America is no different.
FYI American miscegenation laws (anti interracial marriage laws) go back before Anti polygyny laws and only stop at 1967. Did any Anti Polygyny lawmakers make a fuss about anti interracial marriage laws ?. 2020 Utah took baby steps to stop American white supremacy anti polygyny laws.
Monogamy and polygyny in Greece, Rome, and world history June 2008
Walter Scheidel Stanford University
: it was not until the sixth century CE, after centuries of Christian influence, that the emperor Justinian claimed that “ancient law” prohibited husbands from keeping wives and concubines at the same time.24 As in Greece, sexual relations of married men with their own slave women were not unlawful, including relationships that resulted in offspring. Formal recognition of the latter was optional but not unknown. Moreover, ease of divorce underwrote a degree of effective polygyny: while men were unable to have more than one wife at a time they could marry several in a row, thereby raising reproductive inequality overall.
Greco-Roman SIUM was preserved and gradually reinforced by the Christian church which labored to suppress polygamy among Germans and Slavs at a time when the Arab conquests lent ideological support to polygamy in parts of the Mediterranean and across the Middle East. The Middle Ages, as SIUM spread as a by-product of Christianization, witnessed the church’s struggle against divorce and elite concubinage, practices whose curtailment would render monogamous precepts more effective.26 Ashkenazi Jewry followed this trend, highlighted by Gershom ben Judah’s ban of polygamy at a synod around 1000 CE. In western Europe, a brief spell of Anabaptist polygamy in Münster in 1535/6 (and, if true, a decree in Nürnberg in 1650 reacting to the lack of men after the Thirty Years War) was to be the final gasp of this practice, whereas Mormonism subsequently briefly revived it in the United States in 1831.27 In the wake of European overseas colonization, demic diffusion and imitation by non-European populations finally elevated SIUM to a globally dominant principle. The spread of SIUM outside Europe was slow and has yet to be systematically tracked and analyzed. In Japan, legislation against polygyny commenced in 1880. Polygamy was banned in Thailand in 1935, in China in 1953, for Hindus in India in 1955, and in Nepal in 1963. The main exceptions to this global trend have been the least secularized Islamic countries of the Middle East and more generally sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the Quran’s tolerance of up to four wives, countries such as Turkey (1926) and Tunisia (1956) have formally outlawed polygamy and others have imposed judicial restrictions on this practice.
In what has been termed the “polygyny belt” from Senegal in the west to Tanzania in the east, 20- 30% of married men tend to be in polygynous unions.28 In the very long run, the trajectory of historical change reaches from habitual resource polygyny at low levels of overall development to formal monogamy coupled with various forms of concubinage in early agrarian states and on to SIUM in parts of the first-millennium BCE Mediterranean that co-existed with de facto polygyny with slave women, a practice that subsequently declined together with the institution of chattel slavery and evolved into churchbacked monogamy accompanied by more casual relations with servants or other subordinates that were gradually curtailed by modernization. At this latest stage, European dominance underwrote the spread of this principle across much of the world.
The true historical significance of Greco-Roman SIUM may well lie in its impact on the Christian tradition. The current (Catholic but generally representative) position that polygamy “is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive” betrays modern sensibilities and does not appear to be directly derived from earliest Christian doctrine.71 In the early fifth century CE Augustine called monogamy a “Roman custom.”
Was anti polygyny really about the women ?
Female choice
Female choice The overall incidence of polygyny may be explained as a function of female mate choice. Economists have long argued that polgyny is beneficial to most women if there is substantial inequality among men in terms of resources or other properties that are relevant to reproductive success.29 Simply put, a woman may be better off sharing a resource-rich husband with other women than to monopolize access to a resource-poor husband. In this context, moreover, polygyny not only benefits multiply married women but also monogamously married women in the same population by allowing them to avoid unions with the least desirable males.
SOURCE https://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/060807.pdf
The biggest misconception there is about polygamy is that many women don’t want it.
Yet, 25 percent of users of Muslim matchmaking site secondwife.com are reportedly women, while interdenominational site polygamy.com reports that 35 percent of its users are of the fairer sex.
“Every single one” of the women users “made the active choice to sign up, choosing this lifestyle and relationship type themselves,” commented Azad Chaiwala, founder of both these sites.
Mseleku also pointed out how polygamy works well if it’s a choice for both men and women. “Once it becomes a choice, sharing or competition becomes a non-issue.”
SOURCE
Polygamy — Women Want It Too | HuffPost UK (huffingtonpost.co.uk)
Again I say was it really about the women ?
Human trafficking and other underage crimes already exist and are not exclusive to polygyny. My point is that when teachers have sex with students, the particular teachers are taken care off, and the many thousands of other teachers across the U.S.A. are not banned from work..lets use this same tried and true fair logic when dealing with polygyny. Polygyny around the world existed before so where is the great evil ? What’s evil is That being said OLD STATS SHOW a leading cause of family breakups is infidelity (59.6%) due to Roman catholic / American laws not to mention many other problems.
FYI, present day underage marriage was legal in America at some point when polygyny was not legal. Was anti polygyny really about the Females?
“The minimum marriage age was 12 years for females and 14 years for males under English civil law that applied until 1753. By default, these provisions became the minimum marriage ages in colonial America. English common law inherited from the British remained in force in America unless and until a specific state enacted a law to replace it. In the United States, as in most developed countries, age restrictions have been revised upward so that they were, as at August, 2010, between 15 and 21 years”
Utah has made beginning baby steps with decriminalization of polygyny.
Now just think do anti polygyny views come from religious teaching in society and church meetings, a large part do.
All you have is a bunch of white Europeans who grew up in a Catholic taught anti polygyny view..because everyone else aside from the western world is not against it. Middle Eastern..Native Americans..Africans all pro polygyny until the European colonizations efforts spreading Catholic anti polygyny teaching…just look at history.
Now is American still only white European ? No, many other cultures now.
So isn’t it time in 2022 to say it’s not European culture/views/teaching only ??
Anti Polygyny laws…picking on culturally different people. Picking on the Mormons for having a pro polygyny style is the same as picking on other cultures for the same things..Anti Middle East..Anti African..Anti Native Americans and much more..even India and Asia has polygyny. This is like an all white jury for a black person…or the police investigating themselves for wrong doing. Or a chief saying his own food is the best in the world and giving himself a 5 star restaurant award..blind leading the blind.
Again very recent Year 2017, 2018, 2019 White Americans: Picking on culturally different people.
States and cities are banning hair discrimination. Here’s how that’s affecting schools.
“They’re particularly meaningful because black women and girls are being penalized for the way that hair literally grows out of our heads,” said Jade Magnus Ogunnaike, a campaign director at Color Of Change, a nonprofit civil rights group that advocates for these laws.
“If you’re suspended from school because of the way that you wear your hair, how are you supposed to have faith or confidence in your school, and that the staff and the institution cares about you?”
In just the last years, California, New York and New Jersey have passed laws banning discrimination based on hair styles or textures that are commonly associated with a person’s race or nationality.
SOURCE
Like a slave trying to convince his owners he should be free.
Like a slave trying to convince his owners he should be free..yet it took a whole movement with war to change laws. Do we really need a whole pro polygyny movement across the USA to convince you lawmakers to be fair and end the anti polygyny ?Can you see the writing on the wall ?Cannot you see Utah baby steps a predecessor for all U.S.A. states pro polygyny ? If America does not regulate who each person can marry…why should it regulate the number, it does not regulate the number consecutive..why concurrent ?Although in the old days it did to a point..no interracial marriages..hey this is around the anti polygyny laws time frame… You think they made a excellent choice in anti Polygyny laws also ?
Furture generations will look at anti polygyny laws as unjust also…its only a matter of time.
God’s way in the bible (not anti polygyny Roman catholic doctrine forced over Europe, and continued in American), which is polygyny allowed and monogamy not forced seems the smarter choice. I suggest you legalize polygyny now or go down in history as part of the problem and in the end face GOD concerning this.
While pro polygyny laws would not stop the rights of those who abide by Monogamy views such as the Roman Catholic organization. Forced anti polygyny laws stop the rights of others. Which is biased and discriminating against people outside the Roman Catholic Organization.
This is supposed to be a free country and 1 wife forced monogamy is similar to China’s 1 child policy don’t you think ?
There by anti Polygyny laws are still discriminating against those who favor Polygyny which is a form of religious backed by statehood discriminating.
If you took the Religious Catholic/Christian Anti Polygyny movement out of history would you be pro polygyny today ?
Look at the harm it does.
-leading cause of family breakups infidelity (59.6%)
-hundred of years of culture, family & relations problems complete with cutting off life.
You realize bad things happen from being against it in many ways.
-“Virginia Woman Murders Cheating Boyfriend On Instagram!!”
https://mtonews.com/virginia-woman-murders-cheating-boyfriend-on-instagram-graphic-video
-If you have been taught forced monogamy is from the bible and Jesus(new covenant) changed things, you may wish to educate yourself with truth.
The links below show this with Hebrew/Greek to prove this truth.
Each marriage is a separate bond – contract and the Bible does not limit to 1
INFORMATION.
https://biblicalfamilies.org/resources/biblical/common-objections
Biblical Polygyny (part 1): Definition of Words
Biblical Polygyny (part 2): Polygyny in Scripture
Biblical Polygyny (part 3): Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage
Biblical Polygyny (part 4): Common Objections to Polygyny
Biblical Polygyny (part 5): Clash of Cultures
An Open Letter to the Christian Church Regarding Polygyny
https://www.righteouswarriors.com/questions/q10.html
https://www.righteouswarriors.com/questions/q27.html
https://www.righteouswarriors.com/questions/q11.html
“Infidelity is a result of one’s lack of self control”
Objection 1
“God allowed men to have multiple wives in the Old Testament (OT) because men were weak with lust and had no power from Holy Spirit. Now that the Holy Spirit has come, men are no longer allowed to have multiple wives.” Answer: this objection assumes a man’s desire for another wife is forbidden but this is not true. His desire is a biological drive. If the claim about lust were true, there’d be Bible verses commanding monogamy for Believers under the New Covenant (NT), but nothing is mentioned.
a lust is any evil or forbidden desire. For example, the desire to have another man’s wife. Wives belong to their husbands for life (1 Corinthians 7:39). Therefore, it’s a sin to have sex with or marry another man’s wife while he’s still alive.
The KJV dictionary defines desire this way:
An emotion or excitement of the mind, directed to the attainment or possession of an object from which pleasure, sensual, intellectual or spiritual, is expected; a passion excited by the love of an object, or uneasiness at the want of it, and directed to its attainment or possession. Desire is a wish to possess some gratification or source of happiness which is supposed to be obtainable. A wish may exist for something that is or is not attainable.
Desire, when directed solely to sensual enjoyment, differs little from appetite. In other languages, desire is expressed by longing or reaching toward, and when it is ardent or intense, it approaches to longing, but the word in English usually expresses less than longing.
So, a desire for a good thing is acceptable, but a desire for something forbidden is called a lust. Here’s some examples:
- You desire food after a five-day fast—that’s a normal desire.
- You’ve eaten five pieces of cake. You know you shouldn’t eat more, but you desire more—this is a lust.
The thing to remember is: good desires are okay, forbidden or evil desires are not. SOURCE https://www.letspleasegod.com/god-polygamy-hebrew-israelites-christians/
Truth sets free seriously.
Forced monogamy is Roman empire law/Roman catholic doctrine (no separation of church and state).
Roman empire law which banned polygyny from Jews and others..seem to make its way to Europe and than along with the settlers in USA and other Europe colonizing/influenced countries around the world that ban it.
If you took the Religious Catholic/Christian Anti Polygyny movement out of history would you be pro polygyny today ?
UK shares in Active White supremacy laws in 2022.
Can you believe it.. 2022 Just another day of American white supremacy, nothing more to see folks.
White supremacy is alive in the government in 2022, blocking and marking this email as spam is just one example of the enemies tactics. Lawmakers in all 50 states and other Government personal including Judges and Districts Attorneys in some states have received this email last year not to mention similar content emails with this truth over the last few years. 2020, 2021 and 2022. In hopes they will fix the laws.
FYI this was sent out as a email to lawmakers.
What's Really Real Daniel 
Leave a comment