adconline:

[color=#990000]

Could you explain why Washington DC where polygamy is outlawed has more HIV/AID cases than West Africa where polygamy is still practised? Could also tell me why former Gov. of New York, Eliot Spitzer would have sex with a love-peddler with out a condom? Keep posting junk facts

So in your own fact, you believe in your myopic sense of reasoning that D.C has more HIV cases than the whole of West African and you don’t think your parent wasted their money sending you to school talking rubbish like that.
You should have given us the figure HIV patient in Washington D.C to support your claim, instead making a wild statement, when authorities in Nigeria had admitted that one state (Benue) out of 36 has as we speak 400,000 patients.

What causes the fast spread of HIV in one a area is different from others. In D.C it be things like sharing needles by addicts because of high use of narcotic drugs but that can’t be said for Sub Saharan Africa because, use of narcotic is never a huge issue.
Just as polygamy as source fast spread of HIV can’t be the same source in D.C because it’s non existent there. I repeat again that no one is saying that polygamy cause HIV but it help spread it fast in sub Saharan Africa.
And it is not about just sex from their husband. Any of the women can contract HIV through blood transfusion or even a trip to the dentist, pass it to the husband, who will then pass it to the rest of the wives.

use your brain, this is not about defending an outdated culture or system that produced you.

brooknam99:

^^^^^MAN is polygamous by nature!!!!

yeswecan:

Africans are Polygamous in Nature

Let us include our African women folk into your polygamous in nature theory and let see if you still maintain your theory.
The theory of someone is something in nature is always promoted only by the beneficiary.

whoa!whoa!whoa! Eziachi, in your other post, DID U JUST CLAIM TO BE A DOCTOR??!?!!!!!?? LOL. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


VVVV YOUR QUOTE BELOW VVV

EZIACHI:

It will be nice if you go back to the original thread ,probably read it twice, because you seem to be talking something different. I can't remember say that HIV means polygamy. I told you that based on fact on the ground and my experience as a doctor that Polygamy is ONE of the cause of fast spread of HIV within an environ in the SUB SAHARAN African.

Eziachi:


So in your own fact, you believe in your myopic sense of reasoning that D.C has more HIV cases than the whole of West African and you don’t think your parent wasted their money sending you to school talking rubbish like that.
You should have given us the figure HIV patient in Washington D.C to support your claim, instead making a wild statement, when authorities in Nigeria had admitted that one state (Benue) out of 36 has as we speak 400,000 patients.

What causes the fast spread of HIV in one a area is different from others. In D.C it be things like sharing needles by addicts because of high use of narcotic drugs but that can’t be said for Sub Saharan Africa because, use of narcotic is never a huge issue.
Just as polygamy as source fast spread of HIV can’t be the same source in D.C because it’s non existent there. I repeat again that no one is saying that polygamy cause HIV but it help spread it fast in sub Saharan Africa.
And it is not about just sex from their husband. Any of the women can contract HIV through blood transfusion or even a trip to the dentist, pass it to the husband, who will then pass it to the rest of the wives.

use your brain, this is not about defending an outdated culture or system that produced you.

Please argue with facts and figures. Washington DC is currently a serious concern to US.

As at off March this year 3% of residents of Washington DC are infected. It is believed that right now 1 in every 20 (5%) adult is infected with HIV virus. (Mind you the world average is 1%)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/14/AR2009031402176.html



In Nigeria, an estimated 3.1 percent of adults between ages 15-49 are living with HIV and AIDS. (Nigeria is one of the highest % in West Africa)

http://www.avert.org/aids-nigeria.htm

brooknam99:

whoa!whoa!whoa! Eziachi, in your other post, DID U JUST CLAIM TO BE A DOCTOR??!?!!!!!?? LOL. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Why are you whoa! whoa and whoaing?

Maybe this will amuse you more:
I have been an orthopaedic surgeon since 1978 and specialist consultant in bone disease for 25 years. I brought this issue into focus because I met a Nigerian patient this past week that happened to fall into this equation. In addition, this discussion had helped me understand many things.

Why is it such a whoa! For you? Not just I, my son too who is now 36, is also a surgeon at Hammersmith’s Sharing Cross Hospital (Fulham Palace Road) in West London. However, I works privately majority of the times, but I still consult for British N.H.S at King’s College hospital Denmark Hill, near Camberwell in South East London since 1982. Where I still teach postgraduate doctors and still perform orthopaedic surgeries once a week at the same hospital.
In fact, until about 3 years ago, I still treat players of Nigerian's Iwuanyanwu Nationale soccer team of Owerri with serious leg and ligament injuries at a friend’s hospital at Ikenegbu Layout in Owerri until the team was bought over by the state government and I decided that I don’t want any business with any Nigeria governmental body and terminated he contract by mutual consent.
You really make me laugh with your LOL.

Please have a read at the link below. Not my own words!

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2009/12/10/%e2%80%9860-of-hivaids-victims-in-nigeria-re-women%e2%80%99/

geeezz!!!

7 Pages and people haven't noted that even if there was such a law, no one would follow which includes public figures? Such as how no one follows the anti-"faggotry" law? Law + Nigeria = LOL. You will/can never suppress peoples sexuality and it has never been successfully done in history talk less in useless Nigeria, how will this law be upheld in places where they don't even have NEPA electric posts?

Eziachi:

Please have a read at the link below. Not my own words!

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2009/12/10/%e2%80%9860-of-hivaids-victims-in-nigeria-re-women%e2%80%99/

The author is only speculating and has no fact to back his claim. Below is the 1st response to his write up.

m. sani osama says: December 11, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I disagree with the saying that Polygamy had increased the spread of HIV/AIDS in Nigeria. Had it being that the person,who said it is not a muslim,I would have said,he is ignorant of islamic religion.However muslims are not practicing polygamy because of sexual urge,it an act of religion. Women and men practicing polygamy relate only with their partners,so what do you mean by your saying ‘polygamy increases the rate at which the disease spread?’ Please, mind your speech

ezeagu:

7 Pages and people haven't noted that even if there was such a law, no one would follow which includes public figures? Such as how no one follows the anti-"faggotry" law? Law + Nigeria = LOL. You will/can never suppress peoples sexuality and it has never been successfully done in history talk less in useless Nigeria, how will this law be upheld in places where they don't even have NEPA electric posts?

point was introduced on page 1.

Eziachi u still claiming to be a doctor? with all those grammatical missiles?lol. maybe i shouldnt doubt u seeing as im a united states senator myself

Unless women can also marry more than one husband, I will support laws against polygamy. And those making the dumb assertions that woman are more than men in Nigeria have baseless arguments - it seems that way because women are disproportionately represented in education, in the workplace, etc. So, most single women are poor – but marrying as many women is not the solution. That is just another form of oppression!

The country will be nothing until women are afforded the same rights as men – period!

BrutusOne:

Unless women can also marry more than one husband, I will support laws against polygamy. And those making the dumb assertions that woman are more than men in Nigeria have baseless arguments - it seems that way because women are disproportionately represented in education, in the workplace, etc. So, most single women are poor – but marrying as many women is not the solution. That is just another form of oppression!

The country will be nothing until women are afforded the same rights as men – period!

It has been practiced in the past and abandoned, so going back to it would be retrogressive, lol.

Eziachi:

Why are you whoa! whoa and whoaing?

Maybe this will amuse you more:
I have been an orthopaedic surgeon since 1978 and specialist consultant in bone disease for 25 years. I brought this issue into focus because I met a Nigerian patient this past week that happened to fall into this equation. In addition, this discussion had helped me understand many things.

Why is it such a whoa! For you? Not just I, my son too who is now 36, is also a surgeon at Hammersmith’s Sharing Cross Hospital (Fulham Palace Road) in West London. However, I works privately majority of the times, but I still consult for British N.H.S at King’s College hospital Denmark Hill, near Camberwell in South East London since 1982. Where I still teach postgraduate doctors and still perform orthopaedic surgeries once a week at the same hospital.
In fact, until about 3 years ago, I still treat players of Nigerian's Iwuanyanwu Nationale soccer team of Owerri with serious leg and ligament injuries at a friend’s hospital at Ikenegbu Layout in Owerri until the team was bought over by the state government and I decided that I don’t want any business with any Nigeria governmental body and terminated he contract by mutual consent.
You really make me laugh with your LOL.

I do not doubt that you are a medical practitioner, the problem is that you allow your bias against polygamy to interfere with your professional judgment. You assert that Polygamy is a major cause of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa purely based on personal convictions and a limited experience in Uganda, without any  statistic from credible authorities to back it up.

And as a doctor, i am surprised you equate the contagious nature of AIDS to something like flu or measles. AIDS as we have been told is not very contagious (especially through heterosexual means). You can have a husband carrying the virus for many years while the wife and newly born children would test negative to HIV. Also there are documented cases of love-peddlers sleeping with numerous HIV positive men, without the love-peddler herself coming down with the decease.  We are even told that other extraneous factors such as previously untreated STDs and lacerations to sexual organs increases the risk of contracting the decease from an infected person and that the risks are lower for normal healthy individuals. Also we are told that other factors such as nutrition levels, drug abuse, and unhealthy life styles contribute significantly to susceptibility to the decease instead of heterosexual sex alone.  Then there is the complex issue of the reliability of the tests, especially in the same Sub Saharan Africa. Many times the test is said to appear positive for common illnesses like typhoid and other bacterial and viral deceases. Even simple pregnancy sometimes gives a false result.

If as you infer, that you catch the infection once your manliness touches a woman, then i doubt many people (both monogamist and polygamist) would be free( after 25 yrs of the decease). I should not be arguing with you in your field of specialty but i as i said, you biases are interfering with your professional judgments.  

Please do not misunderstand me, i am not supporting illicit sex because there are other equally terrible Sexually transmittable deceases such as syphilis, hepatitis, etc. I just want to separate the facts from the fiction.

BrutusOne:

Unless women can also marry more than one husband, I will support laws against polygamy. And those making the dumb assertions that woman are more than men in Nigeria have baseless arguments - it seems that way because women are disproportionately represented in education, in the workplace, etc. So, most single women are poor – but marrying as many women is not the solution. That is just another form of oppression!

The country will be nothing until women are afforded the same rights as men – period!

You too are using your heart to think instead of your brain. I have dealt with why it is impractical for a society that practices polyandry to survive, read it.

It is not people making assertions that women are naturally more than men, population census of most countries in the world support that assertion and the reasons are not too far fetched.

immorality not polygamy increases the risk of HIV

i will never support such law.

To your first question the answer is that there in Washington DC as well as San Francisco,  the spread of AIDS is perpetuated by those who choose to carry out acts of faggotry and engage in intravenous drug use.

OP blindly insists that there is a connection between polygamy and high HIV cases whereas in DC  there are more cases of HIV/AIDS even without polygamy. This is pure JUNK science or BS. How would  polygamy be responsible for HIV if parties involved keep to themselves? This statement would be true if there are facts to show that folks who are involved in polygamy are more likely to be promiscuous. Which is not the case.  Polygamy is not  the same thing as promiscuity. Science literature that is peer reviewed would state that promiscuous acts like that of Spitzer, Tiger Wood, Clinton,Mark Stanford etal would increase the risk of contacting HIV but not polygamy.  How about Warren Buffet's open marriage? Is he not a polygamist?
Polygamy laws are part of English Common Laws. English  Common Laws were delivered from Canon Law and  Canon Laws govern churches till today. How could you reconcile the fact that polygamy was a crime, but slavery was not? Church of England owned plantations in Caribbean and used slave labour and at the same time was against polygamy? Now, the same Church of England is not taking a stand on gay marriage, but has taken a stand on polygamy.
So how can you legislate against  this practice in a country like Naija where  there are Christians, Muslims, Animists, and Traditionalists etc?

adconline:

OP blindly insists that there is a connection between polygamy and high HIV cases whereas in DC  there are more cases of HIV/AIDS even without polygamy. This is pure JUNK science or BS. How would  polygamy be responsible for HIV if parties

tensor777:

To your first question the answer is that there in Washington DC as well as San Francisco, the spread of AIDS is perpetuated by those who choose to carry out acts of faggotry and engage in intravenous drug use.

As for Spitzer don't forget that he was punished for his indiscretions. For some reason in subsaharan Africa male promiscuity is not punished.That in of itself encourages further misbehaviour.

[[quote][/quote]

There are many causes of, and different consequences arising from the spread of AIDS throughout the world.

There are many causes of, and different consequences arising from the spread of AIDS throughout the world.

Since we are  on polygamy, I would u to show me a peer reviewed journal that supports your case. I argue facts not emotions.

Lets be clear. A Polygamous man by the very fact that he chooses to marry more than one wife has already sent out the signal that he is sexually promiscuous.
So it makes little sense for some posters here to try and distinguish between sexual promiscuity and polygamy. Polygamy is a direct consequence of it.
Furthermore there is no evidence that such a polygamous man changes his behaviour because he has a specified number of 'wives'

The point of a law against polygamy is that for the first time in Subsaharan Africa there would be a painful consequence for the unrepentant womanizer. Right now it is open season for such a man which explains the spread of AIDS.

brooknam99:

^^^^^MAN is polygamous by nature!!!!

This is yet another baseless excuse by womanizers who refuse to take personal responsibility for their own misbehaviour.

tensor777:

Lets be clear. A Polygamous man by the very fact that he chooses to marry more than one wife has already sent out the signal that he is sexually promiscuous.
So it makes little sense for some posters here to try and distinguish between sexual promiscuity and polygamy. Polygamy is a direct consequence of it.
Furthermore there is no evidence that such a polygamous man changes his behaviour because he has a specified number of 'wives'

The point of a law against polygamy is that for the first time in Subsaharan Africa there would be a painful consequence for the unrepentant womanizer. Right now it is open season for such a man which explains the spread of AIDS.

My friend you are yet to educate us with your definition of polygamy and how it is the same with sexual promiscuity.
What of a man who marries a woman and divorces her one year latter to marry another one, is that also monogamy, polygamy or promiscuity. What of a man who never marries but keeps changing partners?

You have harped so much about "painful" consequences for polygamists without elaborating what this painful consequences should entail. Are you going to deprive all the wives and children ( and probably his parents, brothers and even families of the wives), of a polygamist the support of their breadwinner just because he is a polygamist. If that should happen today, can you weight the consequences to the society at large.
This is African and not Europe where you have some degree of social security for women and children.

Tell me which African woman would rather her husband go to jail for sleeping with another woman, she and her children (and probably family members also) would suffer much more as a result). Even the children would not forgive their mother for that.

^^Lets be realistic. We don't advocate that the law should be retroactive. In any case it is more about the government sending out a signal that such a lifestyle is no longer fashionable.
So if such a law were to be promulgated today the consequences would be felt more in the medium term.

_{Lets be clear. A Polygamous man by the very fact that he chooses to marry more than one wife has already sent out the signal that he is sexually promiscuous.}
It's either you are  isolated from the real world or dont u want acknowledge that polygamy/polyandr cannot be substituted with promiscuity. Tiger Wood is not a polygamist but was promiscous. Do yourself a favour, use dictionary to find the meanings of polygamy and promiscuity.

So it makes little sense for some posters here to try and distinguish between sexual promiscuity and polygamy. Polygamy is a direct consequence of it.
Furthermore there is no evidence that such a polygamous man changes his behaviour because he has a specified number of 'wives'

Polyandry is still practiced in some parts of Asia. One woman and many husbands. U are the one who is confusing things.Even junior high schoolers know the difference between promiscuity and polygamy. There is no corelation. You are still arguing from emotional stand point instead of factual stand point. Is polygamy a direct consequence of promiscuity in the west even though such practices are outlawed? How do you explain the fact marriages in the west break down  because of sexual infidelity,  even though they are "monogamists"

The point of a law against polygamy is that for the first time in Subsaharan Africa there would be a painful consequence for the unrepentant womanizer. Right now it is open season for such a man which explains the spread of AIDS.


\\In Saudi Arabia how would the law work against polygamy since it is allowed by their faith?

it,s like fight against a person right to religious belief and what should caution is checking the welfare of children in polygamous homes

H2O2:

point was introduced on page 1.

where?

^The said law is not about suppressing sexuality as you negatively put it but more about sending a signal that the society upholds the sanctity of marriage and spelling out the consequences for those men who take their marital vows lightly.

tensor777:

^The said law is not about suppressing sexuality as you negatively put it but more about sending a signal that the society upholds the sanctity of marriage and spelling out the consequences for those men who take their marital vows lightly.

You have your owns ideas about "the sanctity of marriage" just like a 'polygamist' has. Can you please explain your idea of "the sanctity of marriage" and how it relates to a healthy life?

^^That is exactly what this thread is about. Certainly there is the fact polygamous men who happen to commit adultery,with for instance harlots have caught AIDS and transmitted same to their wives and concubines at home.
The fallout of this is seen throughout rural areas in East and Southern Africa where whole villages have been decimated by AIDS.
So there is a fatal sequence of events initiated by the polygamist that leads to a chain reaction of death,orphanage and destitution,
The point of promulagting such a law is that it sends a signal to male adulterers in Africa that there will be  painful consequences for their misbehaviour and simultaneously empowers the wife in the marriage.

NO, because it's unlawful in the first place to infringe on anybody's privacy.

It is more about safeguarding public health as well as upholding the sanctity of marriage. In this scenario it is thus appropriate to overide the polygamist's desire for privacy. It is that simple.

It is an ancient way of life sprung out of survival means in children. Couples bring forth more offsprings so as to ensure that at least one or two of the team would survive but little did they know that survival of the offsprings depends more on the average resources each offpring stands to gain. Unfortunately, most families were not able to fend for their numerous offsprings. Furthermore, a vicious circle is now obvious as these children who now become fathers or mothers and extend the same problem of their ancestors.

Polygamy is not bad in itself. Islam, one of the major religions of the world, accepts polygamy and it is actually legal in some regions of the world. In this world of civilization, laws should promote freedom.