Pro-Polygamy.com ™

Helping the Media & Information-gatherers by providing
news, reports, and insights from the pro-polygamy view.

Click to order DVD
image
Order Your Pro-Polygamy Passport ™

'One Man, One Woman' is Marital Socialism

Date: Sep 16, 2003
Word Count: 700 words
Cross-Reference: "One Man, One Woman", Federal Marriage Amendment, Socialism, Marital Socialism


The Federal Marriage Amendment would codify socialism into the Constitution.

After   the   U.S.   Supreme   Court   decided   the   Lawrence   v.   Texas   case   on   June   26,   2003,   the   subsequent   reaction   from   some   conservatives   reminded   other   conservatives   of   the   "If"   poem   by   Rudyard   Kipling. 
 
"If   you   can   keep   your   head   when   all   about   you   men   are   losing   theirs..." 
 
Some   reacted   to   the   Lawrence   v.   Texas   case   with   such   "little   boy"   hysteria   that   they   even   started   petitions   to   amend   the   Constitution.   Sadly,   they   unwittingly   "lost   their   heads"   in   abandoning   conservatism,   calling   for   ratification   of   the   Federal   Marriage   Amendment. 
 
Considering   that   such   ones   are   usually   quite   sincere,   conservative   Bible-believers,   it   is   ironic   that   they   would   make   that   mistake   in   the   name   of   "protecting"   something   which   never   once   happened   in   the   Bible:   "marriage"   by   government. 
 
Truthfully,   not   one   man   in   the   Bible   was   ever   "married"   by   government.   Not   one.   Government   was   never   involved.   Never. 
 
Despite   that,   the   proposed   amendment's   wording   would   have   government   constitutionally   define   marriage   as   "one   man,   one   woman"   exclusively.   While   virtually   all   conservatives   oppose   the   visibly   Bible-opposed   notion   of   "same-sex   marriage,"   the   proposed   amendment   goes   far   beyond   addressing   that   single   issue. 
 
On   top   of   maligning   Biblical   polygamists   as   "unmarried   fornicators,"   the   amendment   would   constitutionalize   socialism. 
 
Indeed,   "one   man,   one   woman"   is   marital   socialism. 
 
And   opposition   to   socialism   is   a   key   tenet   of   true   conservatism. 
 
"Socialism"   is   usually   defined   as   a   reform   system   which   displaces   freedom   in   a   society   with   a   (supposedly)   "more   just   and   equitable   distribution"   among   "the   people,"   using   governmental   enforcement   "on   behalf   of   the   poor."    
 
Typically,   before   the   entrance   of   socialism   into   a   society,   free   choice   exists   in   some   form   ---freedom. 
 
Socialism   responds   to   "correct"   the   "imbalances"   supposedly   caused   by   such   freedom,   calling   for   government's   "equalization"   for   the   "poor,"   while   removing   incentives   for   improvement. 
 
In   a   simplistic   scenario   of   real   estate   agents,   prior   to   socialism,   different   agents   initially   compete   to   best   serve   consumers'   needs.   Consumers   freely   choose   which   agent   can   best   serve   their   needs.   Agents   who   do   not   provide   correct   or   good   enough   service   will   serve   fewer   or   no   consumers.   Some   agents   might   be   so   "bad"   that   no   consumer   wants   anything   to   do   with   them.   Conversely,   the   really   excellent   agents   who   best   serve   consumers'   needs   will   end   up   serving   a   larger   number   of   consumers.    
 
In   a   simplistic   scenario   of   polygamous   marriage   possibilities,   prior   to   socialism,   different   men   initially   compete   to   best   serve   women's   needs.   Women   freely   choose   which   man   can   best   serve   their   needs.   Men   who   do   not   provide   correct   or   good   enough   husband-qualities   will   serve   fewer   or   no   wives.   Some   men   might   be   so   "bad"   that   no   woman   wants   anything   to   do   with   them.   Conversely,   the   really   excellent   men   who   best   serve   women's   needs   will   end   up   serving   a   larger   number   of   wives. 
 
The   agents   and   men   (in   these   two   simplistic   scenarios)   have   great   incentive   for   achieving   excellence.   Agents   improve   so   as   to   best   serve   the   needs   of   consumers.   Men   improve   so   as   to   best   serve   the   needs   of   wives.    
 
Then   enters   socialism. 
 
Socialism   removes   incentive   for   excellence   and   ignores   the   benefits   to   the   consumers   and   wives.   Instead,   socialism   only   pessimistically   "sees"   the   consequences   for   the   "bad"   agents   and   "bad"   men   "losing   out." 
 
It   claims   that   it   is   "unfair"   to   "poor"   agents   that   no   consumers   want   anything   to   do   with   them   while   other   agents   excellently   care   for   many   happy   consumers.   And   only   socialism   could   purport   that   it   is   "unfair"   to   "poor"   (wifeless)   men   that   no   women   want   anything   to   do   with   them   while   other   men   excellently   care   for   more   than   one   happy   wife. 
 
All   conservatives   agree:   it   would   clearly   be   socialism   to   liberally   use   government   to   constitutionally   enforce   "one   agent,   one   consumer."   That   very   notion   of   "one   for   each   so   that   each   might   have   one"   is   unabashed   socialism. 
 
Yet,   the   Federal   Marriage   Amendment's   wording   would   do   no   differently.   It   would   just   as   liberally   use   government   to   constitutionally   enforce   "one   man,   one   woman." 
 
Therewith   are   immature   conservatives   "losing   their   heads"   as   "little   boys,"   abandoning   conservatism,   maligning   Biblical   polygamists,   and   mistakenly   seeking   to   constitutionalize   marital   socialism   with   the   Federal   Marriage   Amendment. 
 
But   mature   conservatives   are   "keeping   their   heads,"   opposing   all   socialism. 
 
Kipling's   poem,   therefore,   encourages   all   to   such   maturity. 
 
"If   you   can   keep   your   head   when   all   about   you   men   are   losing   theirs,"   the   poem   concludes,   "you'll   be   a   man,   my   son." 


###

image
image
Click to order DVD

Latest Headlines

From the Archives of
Pro-Polygamy Articles

2017 Aug 19
Pro-Polygamists Celebrate 17th Annual 'Polygamy Day'
On August 19, 2017, UCAPs (unrelated consenting adult polygamy supporters) are noting and celebrating "Polygamy Day 17" the seventeenth year of annual Polygamy Day ® celebrations.  


2017 Aug 07
Finding Polygamists 'Guilty of Polygamy' Pushes Canada Backwards
After anti-polygamy law deemed "constitutional" to criminalize in Canada, one lone judge finds two leaders of Bountiful group "guilty of polygamy," even as case involved only adult women and no other real crimes.


2017 Jun 25
Pro-Polygamists Glad that Fugitive Lyle Jeffs was Caught
"It's like dj vu all over again." Mark Henkel, National Polygamy Advocate and founder of the TruthBearer.org organization, responds to the news and is available to media for comment.


2017 Feb 01
Supreme Court Declined to Hear 'Sister Wives' Polygamy case
SCOTUS denied even hearing the Brown v. Buhman petition, letting the appeals court's reversal stand, not even hearing any of the pro-polygamy merits, and bringing the whole issue back to the status quo.


Read More
From the Archives of
Pro-Polygamy Articles

Subscribe

Media or Pro-Polygamists

© Copyright 2003 - 2018       ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
"Pro-Polygamy.com" is an exclusive legal Trademark of Pro-Polygamy.com ™.