This is an
excerpt from my upcoming book on marriage,
“In
practice illegitimate divorce and remarriage is effectively polygamy. If you
divorce for a reason that is not biblical and then remarry as a man, you are
now a husband with two wives in God’s eyes. Just because a piece of legal paper
says you are no longer married, does not mean in God’s eyes the marriage has
been truly dissolved. This hogging of women by promiscuous and licentious men is
becoming a major issue in western societies.
In
all polygamous cultures the most powerful and wealthiest men hoard most of the
top women and then some. And that is precisely what is happening in our society,
just under a different nomenclature. The statistics on young men who have never
been with a woman sexually are increasing. But the amount of women who have
been with a man sexual is staying relatively stable.
Why
is this happening?
The
answer is very simple: The alphas, or top rung of men, are getting most of the
young women and the lower rung men are getting to be with very few, or in
growing numbers, none. In other words, in practice, even if not in name, our
culture is now already polygamous culture, and this is one factor that is
creating instability across our society. Marriage is meant to be a foundational
bedrock of a society. You can’t ignore God’s will for how sex is supposed to be
expressed and how marriage is meant to function and not face social problems.
This
situation has been made possible because older generations reintroduced easy
divorce into western societies and many men have traded their older wives in
for younger women, and many women have left their marriages to “chase their
dreams”.
So,
the rise of divorce is connected directly to the rise of polygamy or polyamory
in our nation. If monogamy is not strictly enforced, we quickly act like the pagan
cultures we came from, again. The sexual marketplace is just like any other;
those with the most resources will be able to throw their weight around more
effectively and gather more resources and possessions into their grasp. This is
as true of houses as it is for women. If you are a woman reading this and you don’t
like the way that I have just compared women to property, then you should join
with me in affirming the strict application of biblical morality, because the New
Testament is the only foundation text to have ever said that a man and his wife
mutually own each other’s bodies (1 Cor. 7:4). If women do not want to be
treated like Pokemon,[1] then the
best solution is to regulate the sexual marketplace exactly how Christians societies
did in the past.”
It is pretty tragic
and surprising to some, when you think about it, that the end result of feminism
is that women are becoming less and less valued and more and more used.
However, for anyone who has either investigated the sources of feminism, or
examined the claims of feminists, this is not surprising at all.
The goal of
feminism, as I have long written about and which is well documented
historically, is the destruction of all gender boundaries, the complete
levelling of all distinctions. Historically, the only way to completely level
people was to bring everybody down to a lower level. As Nicholas Berdyaev
writes, “Yet in truth power cannot but be hierarchical, and the casting down of
every hierarchism is the casting down of every power of every authority, i.e.
the return to a primeval chaos.”[2] In other words, the
enforcement of equality on human beings can only lead to increasing chaos and
destruction, and in that environment the old pagan ways will rise again, the powerful
will take what they want, everyone else be damned. That is what feminism has
done to human relationships. It has promised more power to women but given them
much less in many circumstances.
The
application of the New Testament is the only antidote for this.
List of
References
[1] “Gotta
Catch ‘Em All” is a phrase from the T.V. show Pokemon that refers to how the
protagonists need to collect as many Pokemon as possible to possess them as
their own.
[2]
The Philosophy of Inequality, p64. Nicholas Berdyaev.
No comments:
Post a Comment