|
|
So I haven't posted in forever because I'm frustrated about Season 3 taking so long but have been watching reruns and trying to get back into it mentally again.
So I'd like to chat about plots and yes I know many of these have been hashed and rehashed but maybe you want to do it again.
What will be the biggest story in Season 3?
I'm thinking they can still pursue the Ana angle for a while but I also think they could overdo the Barb struggle with polygamy within that context. I don't see Barb leaving b/c family comes first to her which means not splitting up.
|
Posts:
16,790
Registered:
4/21/03
|
|
(68 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Dec 6, 2008 3:30 AM
|
> Wow, Jamie! I DID hit a nerve!
>
> And FYI, I HAVE been in abusive situations. I was
> abused by my parents, then a husband, and then had to
> deal with that same husband abusing MY children. And
> yes, I DID use the legal system, and THAT is why I
> feel as I do. The system SUCKS, and that is putting
> it very very very mildly.
highway2success, this was such a good post. I've always thought that if a church doesn't want to perform gay or plural marriages, that's up to that church. The government has no business telling a church what kind of marriage to recognize.
By the same token, churches have no right to tell the government what to recognize, either. Marriage is a sensitive issue because it is a religious ritual, a sacrament in most Christian religions.
But regarding abuse, I'm with Jamie. An individual who says he'll protect you from another individual is likely to extract a very high price. Better to trust police than some neighbor or friend who just happens to have a gun/black belt/other means of overpowering someone. Because he can use that same weapon on you, and isn't going to lose his job for doing so.
--
So I say live and let live. That's my motto: Live and let live. Anyone who can't go along with that, take 'em outside and shoot the motherfucker. It's a simple philosophy, but it's always worked in our family.
|
|
|
Posts:
16,790
Registered:
4/21/03
|
|
(67 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Dec 6, 2008 3:22 AM
|
> Hi T, glad you are back.
>
> I just recently ran into a program with Dawn Porter.
> I couldn't finish watching it as I was on my way out.
> Does she have a regular series? The one I caught some
Yeah, she's got a whole series. Great stuff.
--
So I say live and let live. That's my motto: Live and let live. Anyone who can't go along with that, take 'em outside and shoot the motherfucker. It's a simple philosophy, but it's always worked in our family.
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
12/3/08
|
|
(66 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Dec 3, 2008 2:48 AM
|
Hi all.
New to the Big Love boards, but fan for years now..I too have been waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting..ugh, it's like reliving my "Where is the d*** Soprano's" all over again! Yet we wait, dont' we?
I am glad that on demand has them, had forgotten some 'hidden' stories ....so soon we shall be abuzz with theories and fun. I just wanted to stop in and introduce myself, can't wait to share the season with you all.
Rachel
|
|
|
Posts:
1,355
Registered:
4/20/06
|
|
(65 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 30, 2008 6:42 PM
|
Hey T... !! How was your vacation? I was just this morning wondering what happened to you.
Hiway,
The thing is... about polygamy, the nay-sayers and anti-polyg-activists will always try to make a case that there can be only one ( like the Immortals?) "true love" at a time. iow, one "intimacy" takes away from another. You know the old, "torn between two lovers" syndrome?
I never could understand that. Even women who will defend this ideology don't want to be forced into "Sophie's Choice". Who can't see that it is wrong to coerce anyone into that paradigm?
"Variety is the spice of life" The problem is that we mortals have a tendency to get personal aggrandizement ahead of taking responsibility. Boundaries must be set for those who will not set them for themselves.
Still, if you defend polygamy you have to choose between "stupid or criminal" in today's version of politically correct social engineering. A lot of people who are tolerant of other lifestyles can't seem to get their mind around that.
I don't disagree completley that some social moray needs to change. It is a good idea to let girls become women ( subjective definitions for both ... no? ) before they make certain life choices, like what relationship they really want to be in or not, but it may be just as as unjust to force people out of relationships they want to be in as it is to force them into those they don't want. It is certainly no less traumatic sometimes.
What i think is wholly disingenuous is to make people who haven't made this "moral" transition by today's subjective social (even religious) standards into "pedophiles" and perverse criminals where the lines are not clearly defined .. yet. The laws are even in a state of flux and definition. Those problems are totally different and distinct from this morphing social standards.
It takes some of this socioeconomic and political upheaval to create those new boundaries.
But I kind of resent the hell out of those "liberals" who hijack the high moral high-ground on these issues while they are the first to cut themselves so much slack in their own moral standards at the same time.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,549
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
(64 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 30, 2008 6:05 PM
|
Hi T, glad you are back.
I just recently ran into a program with Dawn Porter. I couldn't finish watching it as I was on my way out. Does she have a regular series? The one I caught some of was on geishas.
--
Well-behaved women rarely make history.......... Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
|
|
|
Posts:
16,790
Registered:
4/21/03
|
|
(63 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 30, 2008 9:28 AM
|
Highway,
Hi! Nice to meet you.
> Well said, Wurks! Understanding the poly lifestyle
> does not make a person liberal, by any means. I
> don't think that anyone who knows me would call me
> liberal. And I DO think that one of the reason women
> shy from the poly lifestyle, and the main reason that
> poly lifestyles have such a negative reputation, is
> that so many men get into the lifestyle for the wrong
> reasons. It's all about them and meeting their
> needs. The women become possessions. In cultures
> where the men marry multiple women because of the
> lack of men and the need for men to take on and take
> care of the women - out of love and respect - the
> poly lifestyle works. In this country, for the most
> part, it's more of a macho thing meant to cater to
> the male ego.
Yep, that's what I've been saying for ages. The thing is, how do you avoid that?
Anybody ever watch Dawn Porter? She did a kind of nice story on polygamists recently. http://www.tvscoop.tv/2008/10/tv_review_dawn_8.html
--
So I say live and let live. That's my motto: Live and let live. Anyone who can't go along with that, take 'em outside and shoot the motherfucker. It's a simple philosophy, but it's always worked in our family.
|
|
|
Posts:
2,049
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(62 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 10, 2008 12:01 PM
|
> But the whole point was to take back the right to
> o marry who we want to marry and how, and take back
> the right to decide what our own morality will be and
> what lifestyle is right for us. I guess I just
> didn't do well at portraying my thoughts.
I'm a big believer in the idea that first thoughts usually aren't expressive of our whole idea around here. I often hve to come back to a subject 2-3 times before people understand where I'm really trying to go.
I understand your position better now -- I think. I also believe that government should take themselves out of the marriage business. They are in the marriage business, IMO, because they want to affect social policy with subsidies (once again) they give tax credits for married people and more to the point, the whole American corporate structure is geared toward dropping all sorts of incentives onto spouses and family of workers -- this causes a situation where people who are dependents and family of the big corporate gravy train are also along for the ride.
This is one of the big reasons you hear for gay marriage (if you read between the lines) along with the idea that the "spouse" of a gay person has no legal right to be with them or speak for them on medical decisions, etc. Of course the corporate gravy train wants no part of letting polygamous families in on the ride -- so polygamy could never work within the present framework.
I think we're coming to a place where this system's iminent collapse tells us that there are too many unproductive people riding along on the gravy train -- so where do we go from here? I think the gravy train has to be totally shut down -- either that or it collapses from its own weight.
So, what do we do next? I think your idea (and you're not the only one pushing it -- many Christian polygamy groups are pushing it as well) to get the government out of the marriage business is a good priority, but I don't think it's gonna happen in the present climate, government and business are way too intertwined in this country.
> From a poly/Big Love point of view (to get back on
> subject) poly people have to deal with enough just
> handling the disapprovement of others. There are
> plenty of people out there who are more than happy to
> judge the heck out of people who choose a different
> lifestyle than the norm. That's why in the BL
> storyline, you have billboards being spray painted
> with hate messages, Margie lying to her friend across
> the street about who she is and getting tangled up in
> a web of lies, Barbara having her Mother of the Year
> award taken from her, etc. And that's a drop in the
> bucket to what polygamous people really have to deal
> with. And if people love each other enough to deal
> with that in order to be together, does the
> government really have the right to tell them that
> "marriage is just between one man and one woman" and
> anything else is illegal?
Right, I totally agree. I appreciate your support there, you're not poly or know any RL poly people do you?
And by the way, from what
> I understand, that "one man-one woman" thing STARTED
> with the Catholic church and Roman government - it
> was a way for the Roman government and the church to
> make more money in t he early days of the church.
> Before that, polygamy was accepted and practiced
> d frequently, openly, and freely.
Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration honey. The RC church and even the pre-existing govmt, in Rome, was strongly monogamous that's for sure. But polygamy was never like totally accepted and free at any point in history I don't think.
--
"You wake up one day and your baby has stolen a foot, where have I been?" Ruth Fisher (6FU)
--
Edited by JustHangin at 11/10/2008 9:07 AM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
860
Registered:
8/10/07
|
|
(61 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 9, 2008 9:54 PM
|
And by the way, from what
> I understand, that "one man-one woman" thing STARTED> with the Catholic church and Roman government - it> was a way for the Roman government and the church to> make more money in t he early days of the church.> Before that, polygamy was accepted and practiced> d frequently, openly, and freely.
How do you figure?? Catholism did not begin until the 4th century AD. Marriage or Matrimony did not become a sacrament until the 5 or 6th century ad. There was marriage, marriage laws and marriage traditions in all religions, and in all recorded civilizations going back at least 3000 years before that. . .
--
Bitches are not born. . . they are made.
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
10/23/08
|
|
(60 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 9, 2008 1:25 PM
|
> > Highway2success,
> >
> > What if people do not go to church? I am a
> devote
> > Buddhist, and I do not attend church. If your
> theory
> > were put in place, would that mean that I could
> not
> > be married due my religious preference? I go to
> > temple occasionally to pray, but I turn to the
> > enlightened ones teachings for answers, not
> another
> > person.
> >
> > What about athiests and people against
> organized
> > religion? Many Christians exsist who do not
> attend
> > church.
> >
> > Just food for thought really.
>
> Something we can agree on JL!
>
> I believe that people should follow their own path of
> enlightenment without forced interference from
> self-proclaimed gurus, religious organizations or the
> coerciveness or subsidization of the government.
>
> I believe that is the way God intended for us to
Just Hangin -
I agree - I think that is what I was trying to say, I just said it poorly. Sorry! I didn't intend to say that people had to get married in church - in fact, I DID include in my post that if a person was nonreligious that they could go to a marriage chapel. But the whole point was to take back the right to marry who we want to marry and how, and take back the right to decide what our own morality will be and what lifestyle is right for us. I guess I just didn't do well at portraying my thoughts.
From a poly/Big Love point of view (to get back on subject) poly people have to deal with enough just handling the disapprovement of others. There are plenty of people out there who are more than happy to judge the heck out of people who choose a different lifestyle than the norm. That's why in the BL storyline, you have billboards being spray painted with hate messages, Margie lying to her friend across the street about who she is and getting tangled up in a web of lies, Barbara having her Mother of the Year award taken from her, etc. And that's a drop in the bucket to what polygamous people really have to deal with. And if people love each other enough to deal with that in order to be together, does the government really have the right to tell them that "marriage is just between one man and one woman" and anything else is illegal? And by the way, from what I understand, that "one man-one woman" thing STARTED with the Catholic church and Roman government - it was a way for the Roman government and the church to make more money in t he early days of the church. Before that, polygamy was accepted and practiced frequently, openly, and freely.
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
10/23/08
|
|
(59 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 9, 2008 1:10 PM
|
Wow, Jamie! I DID hit a nerve!
And FYI, I HAVE been in abusive situations. I was abused by my parents, then a husband, and then had to deal with that same husband abusing MY children. And yes, I DID use the legal system, and THAT is why I feel as I do. The system SUCKS, and that is putting it very very very mildly. And I think you are misunderstanding the principle I was trying to portray. However, I also agree that this thread has gotten a little off subject. I was actually just trying to say that I believe that marriage should be left up to the church, or marriage chapel...not the government. I really don't get why the government has any right to tell people they can't marry people of the same sex, or multiple spouses. I just don't see why it has anything to do with the government. However, I DO see why churches and religions would have the religious right to allow or disallow these marriages. Let me say it simply - the government says we cannot have poly or same sex marriages - why? MORAL reasons! What does the government have to do with morality? I can understand the government getting involved (and they don't, by the way - at least not well. It's a very corrupt system) in abusive relationships...but that isn't for MORAL reasons - that's for protective reasons. They ARE their to protect us, not to enforce morals. That's all.
|
|
|
Posts:
2,049
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(58 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 9, 2008 8:06 AM
|
> Highway2success,
>
> What if people do not go to church? I am a devote
> Buddhist, and I do not attend church. If your theory
> were put in place, would that mean that I could not
> be married due my religious preference? I go to
> temple occasionally to pray, but I turn to the
> enlightened ones teachings for answers, not another
> person.
>
> What about athiests and people against organized
> religion? Many Christians exsist who do not attend
> church.
>
> Just food for thought really.
Something we can agree on JL!
I believe that people should follow their own path of enlightenment without forced interference from self-proclaimed gurus, religious organizations or the coerciveness or subsidization of the government.
I believe that is the way God intended for us to live.
--
"You wake up one day and your baby has stolen a foot, where have I been?" Ruth Fisher (6FU)
|
|
|
Posts:
47
Registered:
10/7/08
|
|
(57 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 8, 2008 9:00 PM
|
I for one would never look to a civialian for help with child or spousal abuse. I would look to a police officer. Obviously you have never been in that situation or if you have you were not big enough to put the offender in jail where they belong. With the Catholic church moving around child abusers left and right, I would think turning to someone like that might make abuse problems worse. Trust me, Catholics are not the only ones harboring abusers.
I for one do not believe my marriage was religious at all. I lived in "sin" with my husband for 8 years before I married him. When I was married I was married by a justice of the peace and God was not ever mentioned. I married my husband because I wanted everything to be legal were anything to happen to one of us, and so I would not have to file two seperate tax returns a year. Thats all.
Listen just because you feel this way doesnt mean even a small percentage of others would. I am a spiritual person by all means, but I can tell by your answer that you understand nothing about the spiritual beliefs I follow. Would it be fair to say I had to get married in a Christian church of any particular sect because my belief system is not a religion, but a spiritual pathway? I do not have a priest, rabbi, minister, or pastor I go to for advice. Buddhists believe that the way to attain enlightenment can not be shown to anyone, only the path can be presented. I can not go to the Dahli Lama and state I want to be taught and expect in the end I will have attained a state of enlightenment because he explained it all to me. I must take what has been shown to me and impliment it in my own life.
OK, sorry if I am ranting a little bit about my own beliefs but you seem to not understand that not every religion or belief system is structured the same way. If we all were Christians and followed that system of religion I think your plan would work.
Just my opinion. I really think this line of discussion should be in a different thread than "Season 3"
--
Edited by JamieLea at 11/09/2008 6:43 AM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
10/23/08
|
|
(56 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 8, 2008 7:42 PM
|
Jamie,
As I said in my previous message - "I personally think we should be able to go to our church leaders to get married (or to a chapel of our choice if we are non-religious)". I'm not saying that one has to get married in church...but what I AM saying is that marriage is actually a religious ceremony, therefore, it should be up to the people getting married how and when they want to get married, who they want to marry, etc. It really shouldn't have anything to do with the government. Here's another statistic for you...did you know that percentage of divorce, child abuse, and spousal abuse is the same straight across the board? - and by that I mean if you took a poll, you would find that the percentage of families dealing with these issues is pretty close to the same regardless what group you poll - and that includes churches. So what I was saying is that since a large number of people DO go to church, regardless of religion (and I do realize that a large percentage of those people are not necessarily regular attenders), if those people DID get married through their church and put themselves under the leadership of the church, and were accountable to the church, I believe it would have a large impact on the divorce rate and the number of child abuse and spousal abuse cases. Just my humble opinion.
|
|
|
Posts:
2,049
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(55 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 8, 2008 6:52 PM
|
> As we say, "That was a very fine sermon Bro JH,
> there is only one thing wrong with it... it ain't
> true."  Because the bad currency will always push
> the good currency out of circulation.
Well of course it will in a system where sin pays, brother Wurks. But in a system where people make their own choices and pay for their own mistakes bad money will only lead it's possessor to a state of ruination -- I mean unless I'm missing something here. 
--
"You wake up one day and your baby has stolen a foot, where have I been?" Ruth Fisher (6FU)
--
Edited by JustHangin at 11/08/2008 3:54 PM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
252
Registered:
4/8/08
|
|
(54 of 68)
Re: Biggest story in Season 3
Nov 8, 2008 6:40 PM
|
I think where we get in trouble is
> when those leaders start dictating and getting
> involved in areas they shouldn't get involved
> in...like (and I hope I don't step on toes here)
> government getting involved in marriage and family
> issues. I don't think they have any business
> dictating marriage lifestyles or family lifestyles to
> us. I personally think we should be able to go to
> our church leaders to get married (or to a chapel of
> our choice if we are non-religious) and that way our
> church is taking responsibility for us. We then have
> to go to our church leaders for a divorce or family
> problems and get them to help us. It creates
> accountability. I believe it would definitely
> minimize the child and spousal abuse problems! Not
> to mention the divorce rate! It would be up to our
> individual church then, to tell us who we could marry
> and how we should live...and that, I believe, is how
> it should be.
I think one of the largest issues with this is how some religious institutions interpret marriage and divorce rules. There would have to be some basic laws set in place by the government to prevent religions from refusing to allow women to divorce their husbands, unfair separation of the marital estate (is that the proper term? I hope people understand what I mean...), and even child brides.
It would be nice if it could all work, but I don't think it could. Just look at countries in the past and present that allow different religions to control marriage.
--
Don't Panic.
|
|
|
|
|
