21st century relationships

February 13, 2013
By

Sister In Open Marriage Takes Sharing Too Far

30 Responses to 21st century relationships

  1. Bob on February 13, 2013 at 5:42 pm

    “From their brunette hair to their dress sense, twin sisters Vicki and Valerie Darger have a number of things in common.

    But the 42-year-olds share more than just their looks – they are both married to the same man.

    The sisters are in a polygamous marriage with Joe, 43, who is also wed to a third woman – their cousin Alina.

    The Dargers, who are fundamentalist Mormons from Salt Lake City, Utah, live together in a large family home and have 24 children between them.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2138349/Mormon-twin-sisters-Vicki-Valerie-Darger-share-HUSBAND-whos-married-cousin.html

  2. ip727 on February 14, 2013 at 5:51 am

    That’s a lot of PMS/dirty diapers to contend with, just to have a steady supply of
    different pussy on hand.

  3. cheetah on February 14, 2013 at 10:14 am

    as a result, we also have 21st Century Schizoid Man.

  4. Rick M. on February 14, 2013 at 10:32 am

    Disgusting. This is what happens when moral people sit by and do nothing while the militant gay lobby strives to destroy the true, God given, definition of marriage. When the wicked leftists get their way, then all marriages become a trite event without any meaning whatsoever. Then men or women could marry braying donkeys and it would not have any more meaning, or significance, than men marrying men or fem marrying fem. Anything other than the God-given, biblical definition of marriage is just animals marrying other animal. It’s meaningless.

    • Sam H. on February 15, 2013 at 4:35 am

      You have strange monsters under your bed.

  5. Jim,MtnViewCA,USA on February 14, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    Mormon having multiple wives: disgusting and icky.
    Moslem having multiple wives: merely multicultural difference, you oikophobe, and isn’t the whole Sharia Law issue an interesting intellectual discussion?

  6. Lyle on February 14, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    I’ve lived in Utah most my life and polygyny is more common than you might think. Usually all the wives are kind of gross and I doubt the husband is seeing a lot of girl on girl action or anything else that might make the arrangement enjoyable

    • Randy on February 14, 2013 at 2:24 pm

      true. its’ more of a practical arrangement than a sexual one — though the MSM would have you believe it otherwise. I dont personally have a problem with it, unless a minor is forced into it.

      • Lyle on February 15, 2013 at 8:07 am

        The young women with old men is another thing that’s unique to Utah, here you see a forty something with a twenty something and its probably his wife, go anywhere else and the old guy is probably with his daughter.

        I almost feel sorry for all the guys when they get back from missions most the women their own age are married

  7. Randy on February 14, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    polygamy has been around for a couple centuries. nothing new about it. so the ’21st century’ reference is naive, silly, and/or misleading.

    • Randy on February 14, 2013 at 2:22 pm

      a couple centuries as far as Mormonism goes. multiple wives (or concubines) have been part of other societies before them. these adults seem to be happy with their arrangement and they aren’t bothering anyone. so what’s the big issue?

  8. allie on February 14, 2013 at 2:38 pm

    if same sex marriages are ok, why not polygamy? if the definition of marriage no longer means between one man and one woman, what is the definition? who is to decide?

    • Sam H. on February 15, 2013 at 4:37 am

      Who is to decide?

      Majority opinion.

      Unless, of course, conservatives get to decide which majority opinions are valid and which are not.

      • ip727 on February 15, 2013 at 6:20 am

        The constitution decides.

      • No more FAKE Conservatives on February 15, 2013 at 9:41 am

        “Unless, of course, conservatives get to decide which majority opinions are valid and which are not.”

        Do you mean like how LIBERALS crammed through 0bamacare when the vast majority opinion was (and still is) against it? Yeah, thanks for pointing out your hypocrisy, chump. It’s good to know that you liberal fools are still projecting every bit as bad as the self-deluded paulbots. Birds of a feather… and all…

        • The Ace on February 17, 2013 at 6:24 pm

          Uh, moron, a MAJORITY of Americans do not want to repeal Obamacare.

          You clown.

          • No more FAKE Conservatives! on February 18, 2013 at 9:46 am

            a MAJORITY (an overwhelming MAJORITY in fact) did NOT want 0bamacare passed, idiot. But liberals think they “get to decide which majority opinions are valid and which are not”

            Thanks for proving my point, you sniveling hypocrite.

      • STOP THE DERP on February 16, 2013 at 5:17 am

        Conservative is the new communist. They say they aren’t but in action most of what they do would make Marx rather happy.

        • Libertarian with his sights on you, Jackass! on February 18, 2013 at 5:49 pm

          Yep. Jackass (who posts as ‘No more Fake Conservatives’) fits that description to a “T”!

          • No more FAKE Conservatives! on February 19, 2013 at 7:40 am

            ^ Says the LIBERALturdian paulbot liar who threw his support behind the marxist 0bama when the rest of America rejected your ilk for the frauds they are. Blind paulbot fools like you don’t have the slightest clue what it means to be Conservative. If you did, then you wouldn’t keep burying your collective heads up the dumbfuck Ron Paul’s ass – and you’d look at the actual facts that expose him for the liberal liar that he is.

            Then again, you liberal paulbots aren’t very bright and you’re easily misled.

            LMAO!!!!!!!!!

          • Libertarian with his sights on you, Jackass! on February 19, 2013 at 10:50 am

            Whatever, Jackass! I’m glad you know me so well. But hey, whatever delusional thinking you can come up in your mind to make you feel better, go for it. But I hate to break it to you again, support of Big Government excludes you from being Conservative by definition. It makes you a RINO. You can try to spin the denition, but it wont fly except possibly with naive people or those like yourself who also say they are “Conservative” but have a big government agenda.

            your little game on here of posting lies, twisting words, misrepresenting facts, and re-defining traditional definitions (e.g. Conservatism) reminds me of this quote from Orwell:

            “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. ”

            You and your kind may still fool some, but that number is diminishing by the day.

            Have a nice day, Jackass!!!

          • No more FAKE Conservatives on February 19, 2013 at 12:50 pm

            ^ No amount of LIBERALturdian spin changes the fact that you leftist paulbots are blind sheep who follow your dear leader’s liberal agenda, without question, including throwing your support behind the Marxist in 2012, after America rejected you fools. Baby-killing? Anti-border-security? Anti-gun? proNAMBLA? proQueermarriage? YUP! you liberal picklepuffing paulbots embrace all that liberalism and more, without question, because your dear-leader told you so – and none of you gutless zombies dares to question your cult freak leader. You cowards don’t know the first thing about being an actual Conservative.

            Everyone knows you LIBERALturdians are FAKES and LIARS.
            ..you’re just too stuck on stupid to admit the actual truth.

            Aww, sucks to be you!
            LMAO!!!!!!!!

          • No more FAKE Conservatives on February 19, 2013 at 12:55 pm

            Now go back to doing what you paulbot freaks do best

            Moron.

          • Libertarian with his sights on you, Jackass! on February 20, 2013 at 6:10 pm

            Hello, Jackass!

            Hey, I’m not 100% sure of what you mean by the term ‘cult freak leader’, but I assume its likely you refer to Dr. Ron Paul since you seem to be obsessed by him lately (Are you still having sour grapes about Romney’s loss and trying to blame Ron Paul for it? LOL!!! You are a real whack-job, Jackass!!)

            Don’t know what your talking about by trying to link him to ‘baby killing’ since he has stated he personally believes in the sanctity of life and rights of unborn. My guess is you have sour grapes over the fact he has stated it is best left to be a STate issue and he won’t fall into the Neocon camp of trying to legislate morality at the Federal Level. Since your so concerned with killing ‘innocent lives’ — where’s your concern about the innocents killed in our foreign wars that grew under Bush and continue to expand over Obama?

            Anti-guns ??? really??? How is being pro-Constitution and pro 2nd amendment — which Paul has not wavered from in his rhetoric, nor his actions — translate into being ‘anti guns’? LOL. That’s quite an ironic statement since its Neocon RINO’s like you that have a long history of only paying lip service to the Constitution.

            anti-border protection? Not sure what you are whining about, Jackass since the Libertarian view has consistently been enforce our existing laws, No Amnesty, and end the “Welfare State” magnet that attracs illegals. Perhaps you are bitching about the fact we question the cost/benefit of building a fence to cover our entire border. You Neocon RINO”s like to talk tough about Amnesty and pound the table we ‘need a border fence’. But if you had the balls to stand for enforcement of existing laws, No Amnesty, and ending the welfare state … then we wouldn’t need a border fence. You and your fellow Neocon RINO’s don’t fool me, Jackass. We know you secretly want Amnesty and want to try to get the votes of the Hispanic population and illegals-made-legal by ‘playing nice’. It won’t work … the Liberals are already running 3 steps ahead of you on that one. So quit trying to mimick them … it makes you look “lesser” of a Conservative than you already are (and you aren’t very Conservative to begin with).

            pro-Nambla?? Pure Hogwash. Just like 99% of your claims.

            It is obvious you Neocon RINO’s like you are threatened by the likes of Ron Paul and liberty thinking individuals who want a small government because that doesn’t fit with your big government agenda. Hence, you are obsessesed to the point that you use every opportunity to misconstrue words, twist facts, and sometimes outright lie to marginalize any high profile individual who falls into that camp. My big question to you, Jackass, is do you have a political agenda driving you to spew this drivel? Or are you that dumb that you took it for truth from where/whomever you heard it from? Which is it, Jackass?

            Have a nice day ;)

          • Anonymous unPaulbot on February 21, 2013 at 9:31 am

            Hey, I’m not 100% sure of what you mean by the term ‘cult freak leader’, but I assume its likely you refer to Dr. Ron Paul since you seem to be obsessed by him lately (Are you still having sour grapes about Romney’s loss and trying to blame Ron Paul for it? LOL!!! You are a real whack-job, Jackass!!)

            Don’t know what your talking about by trying to link him to ‘baby killing’ since he has stated he personally believes in the sanctity of life and rights of unborn. My guess is you have sour grapes over the fact he has stated it is best left to be a STate issue and he won’t fall into the Neocon camp of trying to legislate morality at the Federal Level. Since your so concerned with killing ‘innocent lives’ — where’s your concern about the innocents killed in our foreign wars that grew under Bush and continue to expand over Obama?

            Anti-guns ??? really??? How is being pro-Constitution and pro 2nd amendment — which Paul has not wavered from in his rhetoric, nor his actions — translate into being ‘anti guns’? LOL. That’s quite an ironic statement since its Neocon RINO’s like you that have a long history of only paying lip service to the Constitution.

            anti-border protection? Not sure what you are whining about, Jackass since the Libertarian view has consistently been enforce our existing laws, No Amnesty, and end the “Welfare State” magnet that attracs illegals. Perhaps you are bitching about the fact we question the cost/benefit of building a fence to cover our entire border. You Neocon RINO”s like to talk tough about Amnesty and pound the table we ‘need a border fence’. But if you had the balls to stand for enforcement of existing laws, No Amnesty, and ending the welfare state … then we wouldn’t need a border fence. You and your fellow Neocon RINO’s don’t fool me, Jackass. We know you secretly want Amnesty and want to try to get the votes of the Hispanic population and illegals-made-legal by ‘playing nice’. It won’t work … the Liberals are already running 3 steps ahead of you on that one. So quit trying to mimick them … it makes you look “lesser” of a Conservative than you already are (and you aren’t very Conservative to begin with).

            pro-Nambla?? Pure Hogwash. Just like 99% of your claims.

            It is obvious you Neocon RINO’s like you are threatened by the likes of Ron Paul and liberty thinking individuals who want a small government because that doesn’t fit with your big government agenda. Hence, you are obsessesed to the point that you use every opportunity to misconstrue words, twist facts, and sometimes outright lie to marginalize any high profile individual who falls into that camp. My big question to you, Jackass, is do you have a political agenda driving you to spew this drivel? Or are you that dumb that you took it for truth from where/whomever you heard it from? Which is it, Jackass?

            Stop posting stupid.

          • Anonymous unPaulbot on February 21, 2013 at 9:32 am

            Whatever, Jackass! I’m glad you know me so well. But hey, whatever delusional thinking you can come up in your mind to make you feel better, go for it. But I hate to break it to you again, support of Big Government excludes you from being Conservative by definition. It makes you a RINO. You can try to spin the denition, but it wont fly except possibly with naive people or those like yourself who also say they are “Conservative” but have a big government agenda.

            your little game on here of posting lies, twisting words, misrepresenting facts, and re-defining traditional definitions (e.g. Conservatism) reminds me of this quote from Orwell:

            “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. ”

            You and your kind may still fool some, but that number is diminishing by the day.

            Stop posting stupid.

        • Libertarian with his sights on you, Jackass! on February 22, 2013 at 10:33 am

          Good Afternoon, Jackass!

          Nice to see you posting under another name. But we all know its you, Jackass! Your pathetic response and continued insults remind me how a liberal responds when you back them into a corner (but then liberals aren’t too much different than RINO’s). You know you’ve then already won the debate.

          Have a nice day! ;)

          • Anonymous UN-paulbot on February 26, 2013 at 11:32 am

            ^ Typical paulbot liar.

            Always patting themselves on the back (pretending to be something they’re NOT) …all the while they are supporting a PRO-liberal platform that’s ANTI-border-security, ANTI-gun, PRO-pedophile, PRO-ACLU, PRO-NAMBLA, PRO-Queermarriage and PRO-Marxism

            Yup, that’s the typical projecting liberal liar (or “liberalturdian”)

    • Max Tucker on February 15, 2013 at 9:59 am

      We already have polygamy. See article above.

      • Anonymous unPaulbot on February 21, 2013 at 9:30 am

        Hey, I’m not 100% sure of what you mean by the term ‘cult freak leader’, but I assume its likely you refer to Dr. Ron Paul since you seem to be obsessed by him lately (Are you still having sour grapes about Romney’s loss and trying to blame Ron Paul for it? LOL!!! You are a real whack-job, Jackass!!)

        Don’t know what your talking about by trying to link him to ‘baby killing’ since he has stated he personally believes in the sanctity of life and rights of unborn. My guess is you have sour grapes over the fact he has stated it is best left to be a STate issue and he won’t fall into the Neocon camp of trying to legislate morality at the Federal Level. Since your so concerned with killing ‘innocent lives’ — where’s your concern about the innocents killed in our foreign wars that grew under Bush and continue to expand over Obama?

        Anti-guns ??? really??? How is being pro-Constitution and pro 2nd amendment — which Paul has not wavered from in his rhetoric, nor his actions — translate into being ‘anti guns’? LOL. That’s quite an ironic statement since its Neocon RINO’s like you that have a long history of only paying lip service to the Constitution.

        anti-border protection? Not sure what you are whining about, Jackass since the Libertarian view has consistently been enforce our existing laws, No Amnesty, and end the “Welfare State” magnet that attracs illegals. Perhaps you are bitching about the fact we question the cost/benefit of building a fence to cover our entire border. You Neocon RINO”s like to talk tough about Amnesty and pound the table we ‘need a border fence’. But if you had the balls to stand for enforcement of existing laws, No Amnesty, and ending the welfare state … then we wouldn’t need a border fence. You and your fellow Neocon RINO’s don’t fool me, Jackass. We know you secretly want Amnesty and want to try to get the votes of the Hispanic population and illegals-made-legal by ‘playing nice’. It won’t work … the Liberals are already running 3 steps ahead of you on that one. So quit trying to mimick them … it makes you look “lesser” of a Conservative than you already are (and you aren’t very Conservative to begin with).

        pro-Nambla?? Pure Hogwash. Just like 99% of your claims.

        It is obvious you Neocon RINO’s like you are threatened by the likes of Ron Paul and liberty thinking individuals who want a small government because that doesn’t fit with your big government agenda. Hence, you are obsessesed to the point that you use every opportunity to misconstrue words, twist facts, and sometimes outright lie to marginalize any high profile individual who falls into that camp. My big question to you, Jackass, is do you have a political agenda driving you to spew this drivel? Or are you that dumb that you took it for truth from where/whomever you heard it from? Which is it, Jackass?

        Stop posting stupid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *