Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Sheep Get Sheared Podcast home with people, politics and popular culture. I'm your host, Austin Creed. Welcome. Welcome into the show. So today we're going to address. Issue that was really put forward to me when I was writing my book Biblical Bachelor. I discussed the idea of marriage. I discussed my views on it and in my. Exploration of marriage, unconventional relationships. Single them. All of this stuff. Polygamy kept coming up when people would ask me what my book was about, and I would say marriage. I would say relationships. I would say spirituality, they would say, well, what about polygamy? What are your thoughts on it? And wow, I understand that there are legal cases in the United States. About how it's illegal. I understand that, however, I'm not discussing the legality. I understand it goes back. To a Supreme Court case. But that's not the point. I am discussing more of. We already have polygamist polygyny, polyamory type relationships already. In fact, it's become the norm in America, it's become the norm in the Western world in general. And there are multitude of people to think. But before we really get into who's responsible, I want to address the religious audience in the house because. This is one thing that's never. Made sense to me. I was raised in the Christian Church. And what never made sense to me was you read the Torah, the 10 books of Moses. And you read especially in Genesis, Exodus, and you see that the forefathers of the Jewish people, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all of them had at least two wives. And then. You go over to. Actually, no, I think Isaac did not have two wives. He only had one. But Jacob, who later became known as Israel, had two wives. Abraham had two wives. And then you go all the way forward to guys like Solomon, David, Saul, who are kings of Israel at the time. They have multitude of wives now you know I mentioned David Solomon. Saul. You know what's crazy? How is it that I go on X and I see all these people talking about how Israel was founded in the 1940s and they have no right to be there. And yet they've never read the Torah. And ever read First Kings Second, Kings first, Samuel, second Samuel. They never read any of these book. Now talk about how the Jews have been there for thousands of years, but I digress. Let's get back to the topic at hand. So you know, as a theme of the strong. Resourceful men had more than one wife. Now there are social and religious factors that play into this equation. Back in the day, men and women didn't live as long. The life expectancy was pretty low. Men would die especially. Young because of all the wars that were going on, how abundant slavery was, and so the men with resources, just like the men today. But instead of driving a Lambo and having a private jet, the guy might have had 100 sheep and 20 donkeys. And he could. He had the ability to take care of multiple women, so he did. Versus now nothing has really changed. It's more of the women want him because of hypergamy, which is fine. But then we have this passage from First Corinthians 7 in the New Testament, where Paul says that every man should have every man should have a wife, and every husband, every wife should have a husband. We so how do we go from? Having this, you know polygamist culture. Of multiple wise, whether it be two or you know 700. In Solomon's case. To this idea of it completely being out of the question and unbiblical. I'm looking on. I was looking on Reddit, these subreddit ask a Christian because someone actually asked this question. I found it really interesting looking at how people were explaining in a way people would explain that God didn't support it. He merely allowed it. And I said, well, what's the difference then? That's like saying the government, for example, marijuana is illegal in federal on on federal law. It's illegal, which means it doesn't matter what the states say because of the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. That's which states that federal law shall always Trump state law because in federal law. It's illegal. It doesn't matter what the states say. Because they're but, but they're permitting it. The federal law is not being enforced, so they're letting it happen. They could at any point stop it, but they allowed it. Is that what they're saying? That God did? I think this was less about religion and more about social dynamics. Because let's be real for a second this this goes back to a case that went before the Supreme Court. So you know what? Let's let's talk. Let's touch on this. Because this is where it all comes down to. Because I think people use religion. As a way to explain away. But I don't think that's actually the reason. It was Reynolds versus the United States in 1870. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously, which is rare, that a federal law prohibiting polygamy did not violate the free exercise of religion clause in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The courts decision was among the first to hold that the free exercise of religion is not. So they mentioned the 1st Amendment free exercise. This kind of goes to the Establishment Clause as well. But this isn't supposed to be a legal show, but I want to explain to you why I believe this to be less a of a religious plight and more of a social plight. Because let's get down to brass tacks. Men especially, I would talk from a woman perspective, but I'm not a woman. So from a male perspective, us dudes, we want, we want intimacy, we want sex and historically speaking. Men would delete other men for one of three reasons. One money. To power. Or three vagina. Women have been historically viewed as a resource that is not an attempt to deprive them of their humanity. It is merely an explanation as to why men value the box so much. Because women are seen as a resource, much like gold. So therefore, men want access. No, I'm not going to sit here and tell women what to do. I think Leslie Gore, back in the 1960s made it very clear that she didn't want none of that. So I'm not going to do that. Instead, what I am going to do. As I'm going to explain why I believe this to be more of a social issue than a religious issue, of course it's a religious issue. To an extent. There are some religions on Earth that permit polygamy. You can look at Islam, you can look at. Mormonism, the LDS Church. You can look at paganist. You can look at paganism. You can look at atheism. Even some more cults believe in it as well. But is it more about the religion or is it more about the attempt to? Comply with natural selection so that you have the most access to the most resources. I firmly believe that this is more a. More of an issue for social. More of a social issue because let's look at it this way. If there's if there's a hundred men in the town right, then there's a hundred women in the town. But yet one dude is married to ten of those women because he's the richest guy in town. Do you think, then, that ten of those dudes who know either and get no woman or B have to share a woman with another man? Do you think they're gonna resent that guy who has 10 wives? Yes. Yes, they are. So what would make more sense if you were the mayor or the king? What would make more sense saying, hey, hold on a second, I could allow this. Or I could say, hey, you know what, every every person gets one other person. So that there's no fighting or that it's minimized and we don't have people who are the are, you know, a bag, get ten women and then ten other dudes have none and they're liable to become lowlifes and criminals and revolt against me. Does that make sense? That's more how I see it. I don't see it as a religious issue. I think at the end of the day, people want it to be a religious, religious issue. But you know what? The fact of the matter is. What bothers me is the Christians especially want to almost see the Old Testament as inferior to the New Testament, which I think is disgusting. By the way. They want to take people like Paul and have him be more important than Moses. And what makes me really sick is I look back and I look at guys like Abraham Jacob. David Solomon, you name it. I can go down the list. These men had multiple wives. Did God say, hey, you know what? We are not allowing that. That's unacceptable. No, you didn't. No, he didn't say anything. At least nothing I'm aware of. And so. They think that then that's but that's back in the old days. That doesn't matter anymore. Again, I think this is more of a social issue. I think they don't want it to be true because a they've been programmed and conditioned to believe that that is wrong and bad, and B the feminists don't like it. Because they want to be. Able to do whatever the hell they want and have it both ways and see. I think that we as men have gotten to the point where. We don't even think we could. We don't want other people to look down on us, so we don't want to say, hey, yeah, I want multiple women. Hey, I was designed for it. It's what my biology says I should do. You ever wonder why? You as a man. And I know do not sit there and tell me that, oh, Austin, this is just a you problem. No, this is not the problem alone. Why is it that dudes will be out here pretty much? Don't. Don't tap anything. But yet we're told. Ohh no. You only need one woman forever. Look done my work for some men. I'm not going to say it doesn't work, but for me, no, I don't work for me, son. I'll tell you that right now. It doesn't. And you can call me any name you want. You could say I'm going to hell. You can say we can say whatever the. Hell you. Want I don't care what you say. I'm not here to prove myself to you. This is a conversation. But we look at examples of polygyny, polyamory, polygamy in, in modern day culture, it doesn't look like one guy with 10 wives as much it looks like. One person having relationship relation, whether it's friends with benefits bang buddies, marriages open marriages. Relationships boyfriend, girlfriend, swingers, all those things are examples of polyamory and polygamy. Because if you look at the biblical definition of marriage, it is not a ring. It is not a ceremony. It is not the vows, it is the act of sexual intercourse. That is the biblical definition of marriage is once you've had sex with somebody, you have spiritual ties to that person. And you're essentially spiritually bonded to that person. Now I know you don't like when you're hearing. You want to say it's not true. Look it up for yourself if you think I'm lying to. But this also ties into a bigger agenda, which is why, again, I say this is a social issue. Let's go back to political philosophy. We look at a Supreme Court case, Reynolds, the United States. Let's look at communism, the Communist manifesto by marks. And angles who talked about this idea of free love? This free love movement is nothing new. You ever heard these guys on the Internet talk about how they get sex for free? They all hear back in these hoes and and running game and all this stuff that runs around the free love movement. In other words, will help marriage go away if the women just open their legs to all these men. Because back in the day, for a man to get sex, he had to marry the woman. She wasn't going to just let him hit and ski. She had to. Actually, he had to actually get married to her, not cause the woman wouldn't necessarily just give it up, but because the other men and society, the fathers said. Ohh, hell no. You ain't gonna go. Knock up my daughter and then bail. No, I'm gonna make sure your goofy **** ain't gonna just bounce. And Marks and angles. Lenin, all these men said we cannot have a revolution. We cannot create our utopia. If we first do not do away with this idea of the what they call bourgeois marriage. They saw marriage as an oppressive. That the man was the oppressor and the woman was the oppressed, and therefore to liberate the woman from the tyranny of the men they wanted to do away with marriage, to create a utopia where the state ran the marriage system. And then they wanted it so that the state was in charge of your life from birth till death. Did you get chills up your spine yet? They hated private property. They hated family structures. They hated children being taught by their parents. They saw if you look at it. Like this? They were big Sims. They knew they had nothing to offer the women. Because if you didn't know, Karl Marx was largely a bum. If you didn't know that, you might want to look it up a little bit. But Marx was a couch surfing bum. And so he knew he had nothing to offer women. So instead what he did was Dirty Mac, the women around him. And then bowed out their husbands and then got into their pants. That's what he did. I'm not making this up. There is tremendous history to this. Who do you think were The Pioneers of early feminism? It wasn't women. It was men like Marx and Engels who who were the first ones to really point out this idea of the the marriage structure being oppressive towards women? Who then turned around and they said, yeah, yeah, I think it's oppressive. And then they wanted to quote liberate the woman when all they were really doing was saying, hey, go away from your husband and become a servant of the state. Why do you think you see so many videos on TikTok, Instagram and Facebook and all these other places about how women are burned out and how they're unhappy and they don't want to be working anymore because they fell for the trap? Instead of serving their husbands, they're serving Uncle Sam now. They're serving the big business. Instead of serving their family dinner, they're serving their boss worksheets. But again, this is too advanced for most people. They don't see the bouncing ball. I've talked about this before, how it was Rockefeller and his friends in the robber Baron Club who helped push the women's liberation movement because they weren't attacks the women and they wanted to get the children in school earlier so they could control. Their thoughts and tell them not teach them not how to think, but what to think. And it all comes back down to. Using positive language. To poison people. We've gone from such a traditional society to we we're we're completing the circle we've gone from. Polygamy was actually allowed early on in the United States. Because the laws the the state did not have jurisdiction over marriage, it was a religious it was a it was a matter of the Church of the cloth, not of the state. But then it became a part of the state. Because the government wanted more control over the average person. So then the state got control of marriage, started to define it, AKA Reynolds V United States. Then child support came along, then the feminism movement came along. Then we now we have polyamory, polygeny free love. All this stuff is now available to everybody. Marriage is. Marriage is down. Divorce is up. Well before you know it, we're going to be going back into a very restrictive society. I'm not saying I want that. I'm saying history repeats itself and we live in a constant state of cycles and. This is going to lead to a very repressive, very traditional society. Because the wind, when the wind is sown, the whirlwind will be summoned. And I can already see it happening. Example, though Roe V Wade overturning. Was an attempt to control to stop. What's happening? Here's I'll read you a little bit of a quote from Marx, he said the bourgeois, the bourgeoisie. In other words, the rich people, the middle class has torn away from the family relationship, its sentimental veal, and has reduced it to a mere money relationship. In a scathing rebuke, he further blamed the bourgeoisie and the capitalist system for the absence of the family amongst the proletariat, the working people, the poor, for the exploitation of children, for prostitution and for the sexual exploitation of women and girls in the factories. See how you see what I said. He said it was bourgeoisie oppressive. The family structure was bad in his mind. He wanted everything to be free, everybody to be happy. And when you read something like that, you want to agree with him. Another thing that Mark said was there is no love in a bourgeois capitalist society. Use is the only currency in a bourgeois capitalist society. And when you hear stuff like that or the quote I read earlier about free love, you think, yeah, that's true. Youth is the only currency, but what you don't realize is the idealist utopia he's talking about is just a different flavor of the same thing. It's not actually different, and its approach. It's different in its outcome. In other words, you get a different flavor. It's still a lollipop, it's just a grape flavor instead of cherry. It's not actually that much different. It's the same thing in different flavor. You don't think that in this free love, polyamory, polygamy, polygyny, society, people don't feel like they're being used. People don't feel like they're being exploited. Of course they do. So different. In the same way, when it comes to bureaucracy and use, do you really think that in the bureaucracy people don't step on each other's necks and toes and fingers to get ahead? Of course they do. But you didn't know that because you don't want to believe it. To be true. Marks and angles had also discussed that the absence of the family was the original and natural state of humanity. The original, he says, look at another thing, he said. And this is the last quote. I'll read the original division of Labor was this was the sex Act, but other laborers were differentiated later on the basis of sex and age, which Marks and angles called a natural and psychological division of Labor within the family. Really, private property also arose first within the family, since women and children became slaves of the men. See. See what I'm telling you. He said that the man was the oppressor and the women and children were the oppressed and thus to liberate the women and children, they needed to be out from under the tyranny of the man. But the problem is, once you do that, who's then? The state. You go from Big Daddy. And the country house to Big Daddy in the White House. You will always have someone over you. Whether it's your husband or Uncle Sam, the state. You never free free is a price that's a price for freedom, and most people are not willing to pay it. They want someone else to pay it. And then they end up, not. Getting what they want. I give you a lot of history today, my friend. This is what polygamy and polygyny has led to is. People want to be free when they're in their attempt to be free. They've imprisoned themselves and tried to surpass their own human condition. 

We are living in. 

This Frankenstein world of partially moral, partially immoral. We want tradition, but we want it to be progressive tradition. This is not the world. This world is not sustainable. We're really going to take two steps forward or two steps backwards. Because right now this is not sustainable, but I hope you enjoyed your little history lesson. I'm curious what you have to say about it. If you agree, please let me know. If you disagree, I'd love to hear what you have to say. I'm posting a lot more on my ex or Twitter. It's the same handle as the channel. Sheep gets cheered. So going over there, you'll look just look for Austin Creed. I got the blue check mark. It's all lined up, but my friends look, this is a very important discussion because everybody cares about relationships. Everybody cares about being, quote, loved everybody cares. About these things. So This is why I know everybody has an opinion on this. So let your voice be heard, my friends. God bless you. God bless your families. God Bless America. We're out of here. Have a great rest of your day and really contemplate. How we got here and why peace?