Polygamy - It's All You Ever Wanted

Marriage is simply a social construct. Malleable, evolving, subject to change. A progressive, equitable society must embrace a more enlightened attitude towards marriage, particularly when it comes to gay marriage.

Isn’t that what we have been told?

Anyway, here we are, in Canada, faced with a pending legal challenge on polygamy by the Mormons of Bountiful BC. And isn’t it a grand, marvelous day for all progressive Canadians.

Finally, we can take this next step toward building a more enlightened society. A society where everyone is equal including all marginalized minorities - like polygamists, for example.

And anyway, what’s to lose? Marriage? Ha. It’s been a long time since marriage meant anything at all.

I ask you, what’s so special about marriage? What benefits or privileges come with marriage these days? What special respect or consideration is given married people? Common law couples have the same rights. They get the same property, succession, benefit and pension rights as legally married couples. And as for the validity of the marriage contract – what a joke. What other contract can be legally severed by one party without the consent or cooperation of the other? Marriage, that’s all. Once the foundation of our society – now a meaningless parody. So what’s all the fuss about? Let the polygamists in, I say.

I tell you, I am perplexed how anyone who supports gay marriage could possibly object to polygamy. People who love each other should not be discriminated against when comes to marriage. All people should be treated equally. Isn’t that the basis of the argument for gay marriage? Isn’t it all about honoring the love between two people? Aren’t those who oppose this principle bigots? And if it’s between a man and his wife, or a man and his husband; why not between a man and other wife, or a man and his other husband. Why should anyone have the right to tell loving people who they can and cannot marry?

The sad thing about all of this is that the supporters of gay marriage - the people whose philosophies fundamentally changed the way that we look at marriage – are not front and centre in the fight for polygamous marriage. Oddly, they supported expanding the definition of marriage when it benefited them but, now, when it doesn’t, they seem to be singing a different story. I just can’t understand it. Do they have something against Mormons?

Curse those divisive Mormons. How dare they want us to accept a different definition of marriage. What right do they have to expect us to change an understanding that has been in place for thousands of years. Hmmm, where have I heard that before?

Interestingly it’s not only Mormons who do the multiple lovin’ thing - Muslims do it too. Right here in Toronto, I've read that there’s a mosque that allows polygamous marriages. Wow. Apparently this seems to be a practice that crosses cultural barriers. (I’m getting a warm and fuzzy multicultural feeling here.) Maybe this could be something that brings us together, rather than tears us apart.

Tell me, what greater testament to our multicultural ideals can we possible extol than to allow our valued Muslim neighbours to stand side by side with their Mormon brothers in embracing an important part of their culture here in our tolerant, multicultural Canada. Isn’t that what Canada is all about – allowing everyone to adhere to their valued cultural norms while co-existing side by side with everyone else?

I have read that the lawyer representing the Bountiful (a well named community, I’d wager) male who is being charged with polygamy has stated that he will rely heavily on previous court decisions that changed the definition of marriage to include gay people.

Imagine, Mormons, Muslims and gays, in lockstep, leading us into a brave new progressive world where marriage is no longer the sole dominion of straight Christian people. I’m getting all tingly inside.

So, let’s just take life as it comes, and call a spade a spade, shall we. Marriage has long since lost its meaning. When people can sever a legal marriage contract unilaterally with little or no consequences; when people who are not married are legally given the same family rights as married people and when one woman is allowed to marry another woman, well, clearly marriage is not what anyone could have envisioned years ago when it was for life and only between a one man and one women. Apparently, all bets are off. So, let the chips fall where they may.

And the gambling euphemisms are not entirely out of place here. After all, it was a gamble to expand the definition of marriage. And everyone was fully aware that, once opened up, marriage would be fair game for polygamists. Some of us knew this was true and fought against gay marriage. Others knew it was true but fought for it because they wanted so badly for gay people to be married. Whatever the case, here we are.

But take heart, all you folk who favored gay marriage but oppose polygamous marriage. You have nothing to fear. Canada’s leftist, feminist, activist courts will not let you down. Regardless of your hypocrisy, there will never be a legal polygamous marriage in Canada – not anytime soon anyway. Our judges will see to that.

Even if it means tying themselves in legal semantical knots. Even if it means ignoring any existing legal precedents. Even if it means defying all measures of logic and common sense. They will make up all sorts of fancy sounding reasons why their previous decision to allow gay marriage cannot be held up as grounds for allowing polygamous marriage. All sorts of subterfuge and doubletalk will be used. And as usual, Canadians will fall in line like sheep to a sheering. Gay marriage will be protected and white polygamists will be rejected, persecuted and imprisoned. (Muslim polygamists will rightfully be excluded from any persecution..........It's a political thing.)

Let’s face it, marriage is what it is this very minute. It is not what it was and it is not what it’s going to be. It is a work in progress. This legal understanding was enshrined before the legalization of gay marriage, when marriage was ruled no more important than shacking up.

Next stop – a Constitutional challenge by a brother who wants to marry his sister. I’ve got the remote in my hand and I just can’t wait. Bring it on Oprah. Hang on people, it’s gonna be a hell of a ride.

AIDS and Personal Responsibility

There are those who advocate the use of condoms as a way of preventing AIDS.

Sadly, I concur that the reality we live in necessitates that condoms be a necessary part of AIDS prevention.

This does not, however, prevent me from understanding that abstinence and monogamy are the ultimate preventative measures.

They are much more effective than condoms or anything else. And the very thought that humans are incapable of being abstinent and monogamous reveals to me that some people believe that sexual acts are beyond our control as sentient, rationalizing humans. Are we, after all, thinking humans, or mindless, instinctual, rutting animals?

It would appear to me that those who categorically refute the effectiveness of abstinence and monogamy as a way to prevent AIDS are merely advocates for AIDS itself – incapable of acknowledging that we, as humans, have a higher purpose; that we can actually control our sexual desires.

Don’t have sex except after marriage, be monogamous to your spouse, and live within a culture that advocates these principles, and you will almost always be safe from AIDS and other SIDs. Deviate from this rule and risk other health problems or even death.

This should not be an unreasonable principle for reasonable people to understand.

And, yet, it appears to be that many people want to hang onto their desire to have irresponsible sex and remain untouched by the AIDS scourge by using condoms.

To them I say, good luck.

Just remember, you did have a choice. If you get AIDS, or other nasty communicable diseases, chances are you just made a bad decision knowing full well what the outcome could be - that’s all.

And if you expect sympathy, always remember, your choice to have sex outside a monogamous marriage was a conscious and willful one. One you made of your own volition.

Suffer and/or die gracefully. And don’t blame others for your own bad choices. You are, after all, responsible for your own decisions.

Childless Couples in Little Boxes in the Sky

I live in Toronto. Not a bad city, all things considered. We have our share of good restaurants, lush parks, cool nightclubs and multiple Chinatowns. Of course, there are bad things too, like gridlock, graffiti, litter strewn streets and cemeteries filled with lead-filled dead black men shot by other black men,. But, overall, we are pretty average as far as cities go. For example, like most other Canadian cities: ethnics commit a hugely disproportionate number of crimes; our schools are completely ineffective at educating our young; and our local government is dominated by tax-crazy, loony, left-wing whackos.

But, above all else, Toronto, like most other cities, has become dominated by childless couples living in little boxes in the sky. They are, I would wager, the defining cultural characteristic of our fair city.

They used to call them DINKS – double income no kids. Not sure what they call them these days. They live in condominiums. God forsaken towers of glass and steel stuffed with couples whose limitless drive and ambition have somehow lead them to the grand accomplishment of existing alone together in a 700 square foot holding-tank in the sky.

I hear that it’s rude to call DINKS ‘childless’. The correct term is child-free. And they ARE free. Free to do whatever they please, whenever they please. Free to pursue their careers and personal hobbies unencumbered by the incessant demands of mini thems. Free to leave behind a professional legacy of……..well, a professional legacy of whatever it is that they do professionally: a file cabinet stuffed with legal briefs, a folder of excellently written reports and letters, a staff of clerical workers hand picked by them. It’s all quite impressive, really. And we mustn’t forget the personal legacy: the semi-annual trips to exotic locals, the thousands of wonderful restaurant meals, the theater productions, the concerts, the………hmmmm, wait a minute, these can’t really be considered part of a personal legacy. After all, a legacy is something that lasts after a person dies. Once these people are dead, so too will be their experiences and memories. Never mind.

But there’s still the professional legacy. And it’s pretty serious stuff, if you ask me. All those problems they solved and matters they dealt with. All those memos and emails and meetings and decisions and stuff. And just think, the reason they had so much time for all these profound accomplishments is that they made the ultimate sacrifice and selflessly chose to not have any children.

And they are everywhere, these childless cube-dwelling couples.

Imagine having a natural ability to create life and never using it. What a waste. You go through life, you work at your little job, or maybe you work at a big job, you retire and then you die. How big would a job have to be, to be as important as the life of a child? Your child. A child formed from your seed, carrying your DNA into the future, and entrusted to you to shape and form its beliefs, values and understanding of life? A child who will perpetuate your culture and race.

There is no doubt in my mind that I will, someday, be reviled by everyone - liberals and conservatives alike. Come to think of it, I already am, somewhat. It’s hard to be liked when you have views that are abhorrent to all sides. Purposeful childlessness is an issue that everyone agrees should not be the subject of ridicule or slander. It is, I have come to understand, inviolate and untouchable and must be viewed impartially as a matter of personal choice. It says so in the fine print of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Just dig up Trudeau and ask the socialist bastard.

Well I don’t feel impartial about it. Sure, everyone must have the right to decide for themselves whether they will have children of not. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t. I’m just saying that all these couples who purposely don’t have children are doing irreparable harm to their culture and their race. In fact, some might say that they are traitors to their culture and race. (OK, this is where all the childless white women and couples get really indignant and all the other (non-white) women and couples look at each other and fight the inherent urge to agree.)

Oh, c’mon now, you know that this childless epidemic is an upper and middle class white thing. No other human sub-group is so utterly fixated at making itself extinct. Admit it - most, if not all, of the childless people you know are white. Certainly you don’t know very many black women who have never had a baby. And there are certainly no Muslims. (Oh, stop it, you know very well that Muslims procreate like mosquitoes. At least that’s what Mullah Krekar, a Muslim Cleric in Britain says. And with few exceptions, Muslims are not white. So I can juxtapose them like that.)

Anyway, I’d ask what’s up with these childless white folk, but I already know. It’s really all about having the freedom to circumvent the natural reproductive functions of the female body through unnatural means. Two words: ‘Pill’ and ‘Abortion’. The two main miracles of human ingenuity - next to nuclear weapons and the anthrax virus.

The lesson is thusly: give women the chance to have sex without having children, and they will ALL take it. Some will choose to not have kids at all. Others will wait until it’s too late. Both choices are pretty well the same as far as results go – we get fewer people remaining of that particular human sub-group to represent humanity, and the interests of the sub-group, in the future. And it's happening fast. Some nations in Europe, for example, have the lowest birthrates in the world and their founding people will soon be replaced within their borders by less pigmentally challenged newcomers who don't share their reproductive disdain.

So, here we are, the white race is slowly choking itself to death on unused uteruses and discarded fetuses. And us white folk who have kids are faced with a likely future where our offspring will live in a world and a nation where they are the minority and white people like them no longer have any political or social power at all.

I once had a boss who told me, “Don’t come to me with a problem, unless you also come with a solution”. So, true to form, I not only have a problem to bitch about, but I also have a solution.

What we need to do is work towards freeing the uteruses of all the women of the world who live in cultures were they are forced, or expected, to have babies. These females must be given unlimited access to the pill and abortions and strongly encouraged, through moral suasion and social pressure, to use both like crazy.

And then we wait for that inevitable day when artificially concocted sexual equality (brought about by the pill and abortion) sets their race on the road to oblivion just as it has done to mine.

After all, it may be too late for us white folk to reverse the inevitable demise of our kind, but at least we can work towards sharing our fate with others. In the noble name of gender equity, it’s the very least we can do. And I won’t be satisfied until Somalia has birthrates as low as England’s and a 55 year old childless Pakistani-Muslim-Canadian woman is CEO of CIBC. Then, I’ll know we’re making headway.