Explaining polygamy

Are there any questions?

Why does Islam allow a man to have UPTO four wives?

Let us look at the advantages of Polygamy.
1)-Let us look at a country in which male population is less than female population.
Please see this video in this regard.
https://youtu.be/3RXqDjeik7M

This video is fundamentally flawed, first of all. It's anecdotal. That means an argument without evidene can be dismissed without evidence.
Even worse than that, it's a straw-man. You see, Dr Zakir Naik, doesn't actually explain WHY it's wrong, he just says, "Oh, well there's 7.8 million women compared to men!" And then he swings at it.
You can tell that's false ,instantly, by looking up a U.S. Census
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...e/US/PST045216

Population Census as of July 1st, 2016 there are 323,127,513 people in america

About 50.8% of that population is female. Let's do some math,

323,127,513 Divided by 50.8 is 164,148,776 women.

To find the amount of men, we take and subtract it from our total number.

323,127,513 - 164,148,776 is exactly 158,978,737 men. There are in fact more women, but not by a margin of 7.8 MILLION

If you subtracted the amount of men from the amount of women, that's only 5,170,039 or only about 5 million. So, it's great to see dr zakir naik pull facts out of thin air, I guess.

2)-Let us take out the population factor.
Then.Is it not true that women have more difficulty finding jobs than men?
Furthermore,70% of the women who work in mixed environment,are,according to a recent survey,sexually harrassed by men.
Sexual harassment happens in the WORKPLACE. If you and your wife work in two separate places, I doubt you'd even be around to see it. That being said, a woman is fully capable of taking care of sexual harassment issues by herself. Have you been paying attention to the news lately? Sexual harassment is being taken down left and right. The fact is that more women are coming out about it more than EVER.

So a woman has more difficulty finding a job.
This is an appeal to consequence. "What would happen if she doesn't have a job!"

So a man may marry her and provide for her.It is very unlikely that a man will marry a woman as his first wife because of her helplessness.As the major trend is towarda the Physical appearance of the women.Or the spouses have a relationship prior to marriage.A man ia very unlikely to marry a woman on first sight just because she needs help.He is more likely to only give her some financial aid which will be useful for her for only a day,in most cases.Or even less

I think this is entirely misogynistic, that being said, you haven't supplied any evidence of this being the case. It's purely anecdotal therefore rejected.
.
3)-I myself have seen women sitting on roadsides with their heads in their arms.What if they require assisstance?
So a man may marry them and provide for them.In this way,their lives will be saved and they would not have to beg.

If there's a man on the roadside with their heads in their arms, What if they require assistance? So a woman may marry them and provide for them. In this way, their lives will be saved and they will not have to beg.

See what I did there? I switched around the words, "men" and "women" . I'll explain why. If you make an argument, and you can switch it over to the opposite side of what you are arguing for, and it's just as valid, that means that your argument is a poor argument. Why? Because it's not based on fact, but rather fiction.

You should apply this to your other arguments from now on. Because. all. your. arguments. are. framed. like. this.

4)-A raped woman.A man may also marry her and relieve her of her stress.
Yes, I'm sure that a man is the last thing a woman who was raped needs.

It is very unlikely that men will marry these women as their first wives.But in Polygamy,he is likely to.And this could save their lives.
Meaning a man can marry another poor woman and provide for her.
You're entire argument. EVERY SENTENCE, isn't backed by any sort of evidence whatsoever. I could sit here and scream anecdotal all DAY. The fact of the matter is that it's a bad argument. First of all, I think you should realize that dropping a man into a woman's life isn't going to instantly "save her life." especially since you're talking about prior rape victims. Can you understand how self-entitled that is? As if you marrying them will solve every single problem in their life.
They're traumatized, and they need space. Not you.

Othetwise we know all too well what may happen.If that poor woman is beautiful,some people may seduce her using money.
Polygamy will save these women.
Oh, man are you saying that women are innocent whores who can be seduced by money? I'll let you in on a secret, if a woman is banging someone who has a lot of money, she knows.

5)-A homeless woman who has a child.A wealthy man may marry her and provide her.I have seen a video in which a homeless woman had sexual relations with a man so that she could get money to buy milk for her baby.This is shameful for any society that their women are left so helpless.
While, I'm almost sure somewhere throughout human history this has happened before, It doesn't apply on any logical grounds, the fact of the matter is that women make almost as much as men now, and the only difference in wage is that men are more likely to do more dangerous jobs.

6)-Moreover,A Man has high Sexual desires than a woman.Generally.So he is likely to commit adultery.Moreover,when the woman is pregnant,he cannot have sexual relations with her according to Islam and this is the right thing to do.
So there are all the possibilites that during pregnancy,he may lose infront of his desires and go to a prostitute.May Allah Guide all the Prostitutes.
Hence,Polygamy serves as a means for various advantages.

You're like the type of person who doesn't know what a clitoris is. You do realize that women have sexual desires too? But in your religion are they allowed to have more than one man? No, because your religion isn't interested in satisfying women's sexual desires. You assume they'll instantly be solved by her man while she just spreads them crab legs, huh? This is the exact type of argument that you'd expect from a religion that doesn't respect women's rights.


7)-Moreover,A man has to be just to his wives.This is the Condition ordained for Polygamy in Islam.
This is a self evident fallacy, rejected.

All in all, it goes to show that polygamy is is major proof that your religion is completely stacked in favor of men. Because all of your anecdotes aside, when you get down to the FACTS, you realize that men have rights over women, that women do not have over men.

The very IDEA that women are weak and need taken care of, is anti-woman, and twisted beyond belief. I don't see how you can say your religion is pro-woman when it believes that a woman's best place is at the "housewife #2" position.

It's quite simply the collection of women, and your apologetic nonfactual arguments can't hide that.

(In the Name of God, the Most Beneficient, the Most Merciful)

@AntiScimitar

1) I haven't watched the video of Dr. Zakir Naik - so, I will refrain from commenting on that aspect. However, I'm happy to point out the glaring flaws in your argument. It doesn't matter whether a population at one time, like currently, may slightly have a higher male population than female population. Because as you may know, wars, famine, pestilence, and other matters have known historically to drastically change these population figures and in favor of females outnumbering males. And as you may have reason to know, Qur'an is understood to be a timeless piece of guidance, not only guidance for 2017 or 7th century Arabia. That means that whether or not in 2017 there is slightly a higher male population becomes irrelevant to the fact that polygyny becomes a valid option to exercise for men or women who do want to avail themselves of that option. However, for example, in the U.S. while LGBTQ marriages are no longer banned, bigamy or even polygyny is banned. And I don't see any legitimate grounds for that to be the case, especially as communities who practice polygyny have been known to build strong communal and familial ties that ensures the burden of raising the children doesn't fall on nuclear families as is the case typically in the Western world.

2) Your argument here is an entire fail. The entire reason that the media has broken the story of sexual harassment, as is the current case now known to be in Hollywood, is because women have not been able to handle the sexual harassment alone. For example, the former Charmed actress Rose, was paid approximately $100,000 of hush money to keep her mouth shut about this matter for more than a decade and also blacklisted by the Hollywood elite on the say-so of a disgusting character like Harvey Weinstein. So, yes, while I am all in favor of women being treated as autonomous creatures, don't downplay the human side of being a woman. For example, when I was in college, I had a professor of approximately at that time my maternal grandfather's age hitting on me; I did not complain to the department simply because he was in a position of power over my grades and I didn't want to make a big deal of the matter. So, while I do not know that women have a tougher time finding jobs, I do know that male privilege is real but that doesn't mean that polygyny is an extension of that privilege because polygyny in Islam specifically is practiced with keeping foremost the rights and justice due to the wives should a man chooses that option for himself. Also, Islam doesn't necessitate that a man marry more wives than one; a man is always free to marry only one if he feels that the responsibilities of maintaining households and families is too much for him either financially or mentally. Moreover, there are men in the Western world who without marrying any woman have had girlfriends and one-night stands from which either pregnancy, abortions, or STDs have resulted. My question to you is who is taking care of these women - the child from the birth to adulthood, mental trauma of abortion, or STDs? There's an entire book written about the feminization of poverty by Valerie Polkov, and that is mainly a Western contribution. Maybe, just maybe this type of feminization of poverty wouldn't exist if polygyny was allowed to be practiced. Moreover, women that way are able to choose high-value men. For example, in the Western world especially, females are becoming more educated than males on average and graduating with advanced degrees; men, however, are simply unable to compete on that level and so are found to be falling short. So, why should not a woman be able to have a wider pool of men to choose from, which would occur by default if married men were also on the consideration table!

3) Islam doesn't prohibit a marriage of any man or female if the other person is poor. However, males generally in Islam are endowed with the responsibility of ensuring that womenfolk are not suffering, whether as widows, divorcees, single women (raped, non-virgin, virgin, etc). Just as Islam ensures that children are endowed with the responsibility of taking care of their older folks; it is not because the older folks are not always capable of taking care of themselves. Yes, there are many females, especially in the Western world, able to take care of themselves. But if they can be made available the option of married men, some would definitely choose that over their single, widowed, or divorced state, because that to them would constitute freedom from loneliness and fulfill the innate desire that is in every human being concerning having a companion.

4) No, the last thing a raped woman needs is an inconsiderate man who will either pressure her to have sex or be unable to deal with the emotional, mental, and physical trauma of the rape that she's suffering. However, a raped woman does need supports. In the Western world, there are support groups created for the sole purpose of helping women who were raped to be able to feel that they're not alone, that they're believed, and that they're supported. If a raped woman finds a man who is considerate and will love her and will be sensitive to her emotional, mental, and physical needs, I doubt she will want to stay alone or single for long. Every one of us, old, young, or whatever, naturally desires someone to understand us. Islam is built on the concept of compassion and mercy. And mercy begets mercy. If a woman finds a man who cares about her, raped or not, her heart will incline towards him. And marriage may well be the natural outcome of her heart inclining towards him. You are right that rape victims will not have their life problems automatically solved through marriage; but it is said that "two minds are better than one" as an idiom. So, why can't we here similarly believe that "two hearts are better than one," especially to deal with the trauma of rape?

5) The world doesn't revolve around the Western world. There are still many places in the world in which women are dependent financially on men. So, in those parts of the world, if the main head of the household dies, it is never their first choice to turn to prostitution. But if they have mouths to feed and relatives on whom they cannot depend for financial support, these women will turn to prostitution. In fact, I recall in law school seeing an entire film documentary on India's prostitutes who were working in this manner to earn money to feed their children because they had been long ago evicted or turned away from having any type of financial support from their relatives.

6) Do you know that a man cannot withdraw his penis from his wife's vagina until she is sexually satisfied as reaching sexual satisfaction is considered as much her right as his? Islam cares about sexual satisfaction for both male and female and thereby your argument here is baseless. Moreover, for a man who claims to like science, you seem to completely miss the reality that men have more testosterone, which has been directly linked to sexual drive. On the other hand, women do not have as much testosterone. So, while, yes, women do also have desires, women do not usually have or experience desires on the same level as men. Also, science has proven that women are seduced by touch whereas men are seduced visually - so, in a highly pornified society, men are likely to experience that desire even more. Islam functions as a protection umbrella under which both men and women can bask and therefore the allowance of more than one wife is a mercy for men whose sexual drive is such that his wife may alone may not be able to satisfy with him especially if she does not have the same level of sex drive as him.

7) Let me tell you as a woman (and I do believe I speak for the majority of world's women): We do not want to have sex with four men even if it had been allowed as we're naturally inclined towards having one man love us completely and sincerely; there are cultures in the world that women have more than one husband, and it's been found of course that in those tribes or societies it cannot be gauged who the child's father is once the woman is pregnant. If not having to deal with trite and pretty catchphrases like "equality" that obfuscate the issues, women would naturally incline more towards what is just or fair for their gender as a whole rather than "equality." In a silly but relevant example, equality would mean that a 200-pound man is given the same heavy carton of boxes to carry as the 70-pound child. However, Islam doesn't aspire towards notions of "equality" that can create injustice. Rather, Islam aspires towards mercy and justice in the balance. Therefore, Islam doesn't say that women are allowed to marry four men because it would create injustice towards both her and her male partners; for one, a woman may not desire to have sex during her menstrual cycle, which means that she would be "out of cycle" (pun intended) for at least 5-10 days and therefore the four males if she were allowed to marry four would have to wait out that cycle creating unfairness for them if loyalty was part of that marriage's bargain. And two, women would be vaginally sore if were expected to service four men. Sorry, women do not have the desire or the capability to do justice in this scenario, which is why your entire argument here like from 1-6 is bogus.

And FYI, just because you're an atheist, doesn't mean you've acquired any type of wisdom or logic or great knowledge to criticize Islam because I've seen you over and over making arguments with loopholes a mile wide and sky high. You just hate Islam as you've proven; yes, we get it. If you don't want Islam, that's great. Islam is meant for people willing to be sincere to God, which you're entirely not in the mood or frame of mind to be; when you are, we can talk. Until then, you're just another person who has an Internet connection and access to a site which allows you to speak your mind.

Peace.

I haven't watched the video of Dr. Zakir Naik - so, I will refrain from commenting on that aspect. However, I'm happy to point out the glaring flaws in your argument. It doesn't matter whether a population at one time, like currently, may slightly have a higher male population than female population. Because as you may know, wars, famine, pestilence, and other matters have known historically to drastically change these population figures and in favor of females outnumbering males. And as you may have reason to know, Qur'an is understood to be a timeless piece of guidance, not only guidance for 2017 or 7th century Arabia. That means that whether or not in 2017 there is slightly a higher male population becomes irrelevant to the fact that polygyny becomes a valid option to exercise for men or women who do want to avail themselves of that option. However, for example, in the U.S. while LGBTQ marriages are no longer banned, bigamy or even polygyny is banned. And I don't see any legitimate grounds for that to be the case, especially as communities who practice polygyny have been known to build strong communal and familial ties that ensures the burden of raising the children doesn't fall on nuclear families as is the case typically in the Western world.

My problem with polygamy in your religion is the fact that only the males can do it. And there's two things about your argument, one if we're actually looking at the census, females actually have overtaken males. I would say that the quran is actually a very outdated piece of guidance, considering all the glaring flaws it has. That being said, polygamy isn't a good lifestyle. In how it's usually practiced, one man with 1-4 women inherently leads to strife and resentment. I don't think you'd want to share your husband with anyone, would you?? It's almost as if he's collecting dolls instead of women.

2) Your argument here is an entire fail. The entire reason that the media has broken the story of sexual harassment, as is the current case now known to be in Hollywood, is because women have not been able to handle the sexual harassment alone. For example, the former Charmed actress Rose, was paid approximately $100,000 of hush money to keep her mouth shut about this matter for more than a decade and also blacklisted by the Hollywood elite on the say-so of a disgusting character like Harvey Weinstein. So, yes, while I am all in favor of women being treated as autonomous creatures, don't downplay the human side of being a woman.

I have never downplayed the human side of women. Your friend over there made the assertion that women NEED a man in their lives to protect them, and I've simply said that isn't true.

For example, when I was in college, I had a professor of approximately at that time my maternal grandfather's age hitting on me; I did not complain to the department simply because he was in a position of power over my grades and I didn't want to make a big deal of the matter.

Yeah, that's honestly bull. But what MuhammadHamza would want you to believe is that if you had a nice and strong male with you, that wouldn't have happened. That's why he says polygamy exists in your religion, because females are weak and need protected. I am 100% against that idea, therefore against polygamy.

So, while I do not know that women have a tougher time finding jobs, I do know that male privilege is real but that doesn't mean that polygyny is an extension of that privilege because polygyny in Islam specifically is practiced with keeping foremost the rights and justice due to the wives should a man chooses that option for himself. Also, Islam doesn't necessitate that a man marry more wives than one; a man is always free to marry only one if he feels that the responsibilities of maintaining households and families is too much for him either financially or mentally. Moreover, there are men in the Western world who without marrying any woman have had girlfriends and one-night stands from which either pregnancy, abortions, or STDs have resulted. My question to you is who is taking care of these women - the child from the birth to adulthood, mental trauma of abortion, or STDs?

Women don't have a tougher time finding jobs, the unemployment rate is kinda the same on both sides. The idea of polygamy in your religion IS for men, since women can't have more than one husband. It will always lead to unbalanced relationships. Even if Islam doesn't necessitate that a man take more than one wife, he still can if he wants to and that's just another right a man has over a woman. Men having girlfriends is a different issue, since the entire idea of a "girlfriend" is basically a modern extension of courtships. It usually goes girlfriend -> wife. That being said, the chance of STDs is greatly reduced in a monogamous relationship, since you're only ever sleeping with one person.

There's an entire book written about the feminization of poverty by Valerie Polkov, and that is mainly a Western contribution. Maybe, just maybe this type of feminization of poverty wouldn't exist if polygyny was allowed to be practiced. Moreover, women that way are able to choose high-value men. For example, in the Western world especially, females are becoming more educated than males on average and graduating with advanced degrees; men, however, are simply unable to compete on that level and so are found to be falling short. So, why should not a woman be able to have a wider pool of men to choose from, which would occur by default if married men were also on the consideration table!

You're talking about married men being considered, but your reason for doing so doesn't make any sense. You're saying that women go onto get higher degrees, therefore they should be able to marry down onto a man who's already taking care of one household? Where is the logic there? A high valued man, is not one you are more educated, have a better job, and make more money than. If you want to do this, it's entirely your choice, I'm just saying it's a non-sequitur. And one other thing, you talk about a, "wider" pool of men, but there are single guys literally everywhere. You don't have to look very hard.

3) Islam doesn't prohibit a marriage of any man or female if the other person is poor. However, males generally in Islam are endowed with the responsibility of ensuring that womenfolk are not suffering, whether as widows, divorcees, single women (raped, non-virgin, virgin, etc). Just as Islam ensures that children are endowed with the responsibility of taking care of their older folks; it is not because the older folks are not always capable of taking care of themselves. Yes, there are many females, especially in the Western world, able to take care of themselves. But if they can be made available the option of married men, some would definitely choose that over their single, widowed, or divorced state, because that to them would constitute freedom from loneliness and fulfill the innate desire that is in every human being concerning having a companion.

I'm actually pretty sure that in a marriage, the spouses are supposed to support each other. Islam ensures that women are constantly put down, since they're stuck in that, "Taken care of " spot. That being said, "innate" desires are rejected because it applies to a self evident fallacy. There's no evidence supporting your claim that every single woman in the west would LOVE to be married.

4) No, the last thing a raped woman needs is an inconsiderate man who will either pressure her to have sex or be unable to deal with the emotional, mental, and physical trauma of the rape that she's suffering. However, a raped woman does need supports. In the Western world, there are support groups created for the sole purpose of helping women who were raped to be able to feel that they're not alone, that they're believed, and that they're supported. If a raped woman finds a man who is considerate and will love her and will be sensitive to her emotional, mental, and physical needs, I doubt she will want to stay alone or single for long. Every one of us, old, young, or whatever, naturally desires someone to understand us. Islam is built on the concept of compassion and mercy. And mercy begets mercy. If a woman finds a man who cares about her, raped or not, her heart will incline towards him. And marriage may well be the natural outcome of her heart inclining towards him. You are right that rape victims will not have their life problems automatically solved through marriage; but it is said that "two minds are better than one" as an idiom. So, why can't we here similarly believe that "two hearts are better than one," especially to deal with the trauma of rape?

I can kind of agree with you on this one, because it isn't making a single assertion about polygamy! Yes, rape victims need support, but that support does not have to be through a relationship, if a rape victim does find support through a relationship, that's fine by him/her. But there are always other options.

5) The world doesn't revolve around the Western world. There are still many places in the world in which women are dependent financially on men. So, in those parts of the world, if the main head of the household dies, it is never their first choice to turn to prostitution. But if they have mouths to feed and relatives on whom they cannot depend for financial support, these women will turn to prostitution. In fact, I recall in law school seeing an entire film documentary on India's prostitutes who were working in this manner to earn money to feed their children because they had been long ago evicted or turned away from having any type of financial support from their relatives.

While that's honestly very sad, don't you think a man marrying 4 women in this situation would be even sadder? Too me, it seems like it would just be a man using his financial status to gather himself a small little harem!

Do you know that a man cannot withdraw his penis from his wife's vagina until she is sexually satisfied as reaching sexual satisfaction is considered as much her right as his? Islam cares about sexual satisfaction for both male and female and thereby your argument here is baseless. Moreover, for a man who claims to like science, you seem to completely miss the reality that men have more testosterone, which has been directly linked to sexual drive. On the other hand, women do not have as much testosterone. So, while, yes, women do also have desires, women do not usually have or experience desires on the same level as men. Also, science has proven that women are seduced by touch whereas men are seduced visually - so, in a highly pornified society, men are likely to experience that desire even more. Islam functions as a protection umbrella under which both men and women can bask and therefore the allowance of more than one wife is a mercy for men whose sexual drive is such that his wife may alone may not be able to satisfy with him especially if she does not have the same level of sex drive as him.

I never made a comment on the assertion that men have higher sex drives, I know they do, because of testosterone. Muhammad Hamza, was making the assertion that because men have higher sex drives, they should be able to marry more women. He was missing the point that, women have sexual desires too, but in your religion they aren't able to marry more than one man, which is unfair. In regard to men not being able to leave until they satisfy their woman, 75 percent of all women never reach orgasm from intercourse alone. So you might get stuck with a limpy.

) Let me tell you as a woman (and I do believe I speak for the majority of world's women): We do not want to have sex with four men even if it had been allowed as we're naturally inclined towards having one man love us completely and sincerely; there are cultures in the world that women have more than one husband, and it's been found of course that in those tribes or societies it cannot be gauged who the child's father is once the woman is pregnant.

First of all, you started that out with a NICE and general blanket assumption, here's a fact: You are a woman. Here's another fact: You don't speak for all women. You speaking for all MUSLIM women would be believable, but all the WORLD'S woman? Nah fam.

That being said, you just said that a man doesn't HAVE to marry more than one woman, they just can. So why can't the same apply to women? In a religion that caims to be equal to women, that should be the case for plain and simple equality. There are many ways in modern society to tell who the father is. The fact is that polygamy is a right that men have over women, that's unequal.

If not having to deal with trite and pretty catchphrases like "equality" that obfuscate the issues, women would naturally incline more towards what is just or fair for their gender as a whole rather than "equality."

I don't think you realize that the definition of "equality" would be, "What's fair for their gender as a whole." derp. As it stands, men marrying four women is NOT equal, or just, or even right, considering how it's unequal.

In a silly but relevant example, equality would mean that a 200-pound man is given the same heavy carton of boxes to carry as the 70-pound child. However, Islam doesn't aspire towards notions of "equality" that can create injustice.

No, what you described is not "equality". You've described an inequality. Equality, would be a 200ibs man carrying 200bs, and a 70ibs child; carrying 70ibs.

Just like how a man marrying 4 women, is unequal to a woman being able to marry 1 man.

Rather, Islam aspires towards mercy and justice in the balance. Therefore, Islam doesn't say that women are allowed to marry four men because it would create injustice towards both her and her male partners; for one.

I would argue, that a man with his 4-woman harem would lead to resentment and discourse in their marriage too. Quite simply, because it isn't equal. But if both parties, decided that they wanted to marry other people, and they agreed with each other, that would be the definition of equality. Where your religion stands right now, only men can marry more than one spouse, which isn't equality in the slightest.

a woman may not desire to have sex during her menstrual cycle, which means that she would be "out of cycle" (pun intended) for at least 5-10 days and therefore the four males if she were allowed to marry four would have to wait out that cycle creating unfairness for them if loyalty was part of that marriage's bargain.

I see what you did there. Menstrual cycle, out of cycle. Nice
And that's probably more a problem with polygamy rather a problem with, "Equality" the fact is that I doubt anyone, whether male or female, would be able to have back-to-back sex with four partners. I am against polygamy, but I feel that if your religion MUST have polygamy, it should be equal on both sides.

And two, women would be vaginally sore if were expected to service four men. Sorry, women do not have the desire or the capability to do justice in this scenario, which is why your entire argument here like from 1-6 is bogus.

Men would be dick-ishly sore if they were expected to service four women, men have a higher sex drive, yes, but that doesn't constitute to BACK-TO-BACK-ACTION (Or perhaps front-to-front action?).
Besides, one could make the argument, that if you have four men, and four women on each side of the marriage, they could perhaps satisfy each other? Because equality.

And FYI, just because you're an atheist, doesn't mean you've acquired any type of wisdom or logic or great knowledge to criticize Islam because I've seen you over and over making arguments with loopholes a mile wide and sky high. You just hate Islam as you've proven; yes, we get it. If you don't want Islam, that's great. Islam is meant for people willing to be sincere to God, which you're entirely not in the mood or frame of mind to be; when you are, we can talk. Until then, you're just another person who has an Internet connection and access to a site which allows you to speak your mind.

I haven't made a single argument with a, "loophole." Whereas, I've seen plenty of anecdotal arguments from this site. And honestly, there isn't much of a point in giving me flake for being here, since your site ALLOWS me to be here. Much like the Islamic frame of mind, I'm sure that you only allow disbelievers onto your site so you can, "convince" them of the truth. But

lord forbid I use your site to speak my mind! The fact is with Islam, is that they allow criticism of anyone else, EXCEPT their own religion. That's why you even bothered to bring this into the issue of polygamy.

As a women we’d rather be side wives then side hoes. Simple. Polygamy or affair?