Threesome Marriages
 

First came traditional marriage. Then, gay marriage. Now, there's a movement combining both—simultaneously. Abby Ellin visits the next frontier of nuptials: the "triad."


Snip........http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-a...arriages/full/

There’s no putting this cat back in the bag.

We’re going to need a societal reboot.

i think Russian roulette with a semiautomatic would be more appealing.....it's tough enough to find happy ground with one partner, but two....no thanks. let the big'uns and the fugly's experiment.

One Guy & Two Gals......

There is a sage piece of advice in the novel "Baja Oklahoma","If it Fly's,Floats or Phucks..Rent it,Don't Buy it.":cool:

I think it goes double here.:eek:

TRAID?? Lets explore this. One man, one woman and one goat?? :D

Next it will be a Quad....you pick the next perversion..:eek:

The traditional definition of a marriage has been a union between one man and one woman. I was and still am against opening up that definition to include gay and lesbien couples because I have felt that once the definition is changed, where does it end? I have absolutely noting against gays and lesbiens being legally united but it should not be considered a marriage. Now we have "triads". What's next, a man and his dog, or sheep? :eek::rolleyes:

Wayne

Wayne,

While not the same as this, remember the Mormons used to have multiple wives and I believe that there is one in Salt Lake or near there now that has 2 or 3 wives. While that is far different from this mess, I am not sure just where this would go. What about if they decide to break up. Who gets what? As with the gay marriage thing, I am against it, but just because I believe it is wrong, not because I don't like them. My biggest dislike of the whole thing is the way the media is just making it headline news and basically shoving it down everyones throats. What they or anyone else does in private is their business and not mine, I just don't want to hear about it. When I watch the news I want to see what is happening in the world and country, not 30 minutes of Gay Marriage babble.

Ron :(

Ron, I have to agree with you, the media does go on about it to the point of nausiam.

I'm sure it's wrong, why else would Jesus have gone on about it so on the sermon on the mount, Oh wait, Jesus never mentioned it EVER! and in the old testament, it was an excepted practice to have multiple wives, and concubines, and slaves, and you could sell your children Hmmmm maybe I should stop, I'm not helping my argument.

CDC,

but you so liked the idea of 2 girls kissing......lolololol.....i2f

Recreationally speaking, that’s true. Actually, a recreational threesome can be one heck of a good time, been there – done that many years ago, especially fun is directing the activities of the two women.

Triads seem like the natural outcome of the gay marriage tend. We are all doomed.

Hmmmm Been there done that, but you do tread on thin ice if you spend to much time in one spot.
lol
joeg

Truthfully, it was a nightmare at times - but as it turned out, I was just being used by the primary stars of the event. Being used can be a b@@ch sometimes, but not all the time.

How about taking a serious look at the advantages of multiple wife's.

One could be a CEO and bring home the beacon, one could cook dinner and clean the house. One more could raise the kids and walk the dogs. Oh yaeh, one could pull manitenance on the estate and keep the cars clean.
Then you would need one that looked like a cheap hooker to ride in your Cobra to impress your friends.......

Now I'm thinkin this is not going to work, cause I could never remember all their names, and just what would they expect from me?

GEEEEEEEZ ! Old Bill

You know what they say about PMS... if 1 woman has it... they all do.... I DON'T EVEN THINK SO!!!!!

One is more than enough!

Wouldn't that be great to come home after a long day at work dreaming of wild sex with two women,only to find they have been transformed into a PMS Brigade and you are the "Objective".:eek:

:LOL: that's exactly what I was thinking when I first heard this...

LoBelly

cobra bill – I have to respectfully disagree with your line of reasoning and conclusions.

You stated that Jesus didn’t ever mention homosexual behavior in his teachings. It appears that you believe that since Jesus didn’t SPECIFICALLY condemn homosexual behavior, homosexual behavior is therefore condoned by GOD. I’m not a Biblical scholar, but I don’t think that Jesus SPECIFICALLY forbid child abuse or spousal abuse. Using your logic, are we therefore to conclude that GOD CONDONES these behaviors?

Jesus was crucified before Paul (Saul of Tarsus) began his ministry so I don’t think we should expect Jesus himself to say a lot about Paul’s ministry. However, Jesus did appear personally to Paul on the road to Damascus and subsequently instructed Paul to start a ministry preaching about Jesus. Most Christians, me included, believe that Paul was guided by Jesus in his ministry and that Paul’s words were inspired by Jesus.

Paul states in his first letter to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 7:2) that “2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.”

As I stated earlier, I’m not a Biblical scholar, but from everything I’ve read, this means that a man should be married to only one woman and vice versa.

Paul writes in his letter to the Romans (Romans 1:21-26) 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. 28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

Elsewhere in 1st Corinthians (1 Corinthians 6:9-10), Paul writes; 9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Isn’t this pretty clear that the Bible condemns homosexual behavior? And that marriage is a union between one man and one woman?

Excellent post. Now, do they say anything about putting dual roll bars on a Cobra?

It's certainly going to get 'curiouser and curiouser'. Here in TX we have had an issue with the G men getting rambunctious about polygamy, but surely that will be the next battlefront. Once the gay unions can be called marriage, surely one of the polygamists can say 'at least I married WOMEN!" and use the queer dears as a blueprint for legalization.