No, an Eye-talian, is a dago ( or deigo) as well....A wop is an Italian. Spaniards are dagos
(Being half eye-tie deigo, I should know...

No, an Eye-talian, is a dago ( or deigo) as well....A wop is an Italian. Spaniards are dagos
Right - it wasn't Sir Fra Dra - it was Horatio Hornblower I was thinking of.The word 'dago' is a derivative of the Spanish name 'Diego', which means 'James'. It was originally coined in the 17th century by British sailors to indicate Spanish or Portuguese people, especially sailors. Despite the hispanic origin of the word, in the 19th century the word 'dago' became more commonly used in the USA as a derogatory term for Italians, due to the large immigration from that country. However, it is still used to indicate Spanish or Portuguese people as well, but rarely the French."
Here's a much better analogy: Person A graduates from high school, and receives a diploma. The school has a policy that everyone who passes all the required classes with a certain GPA gets a diploma...as long as they are right-handed. (If you're a lefty, it doesn't matter how smart you are or how good your grades are: no diploma for you!) The following year, the school changes its policy so that the right-handed requirement no longer applies, and henceforth left-handed individuals need only meet the same academic standards as everyone else.dgs49 wrote:Consider: A person is valedictorian of her HS class. Academically, the #1 student. The following year, the school announces that henceforth everyone having a certain GPA will be given the title, "Valedictorian." In the first year of the new policy, 25 students are awarded valedictorian pins.
In protest, person #1, notifies the school that she is "turning in" her valedictorian pin. It has been rendered essentially meaningless (n her view).
Wes this is not the Middle East for ever man that has three wives there could be a woman with three husbands. Wes remove your mind from the bigotry of our current society and think outside of the box as they say. Look at the advantages: A family would have four possible wage earners; with that many wage earners one adult could afford to stay home with the children. I believe it would reduce divorces which are bad for children. Does anyone deny that? Think, what is the main cause of divorce?wesw wrote:ok lib, I ll take your bait. polygamy hurts society because it makes many young men do without females. in fundamentalist Mormon communities young men are driven away to fend for themselves, like young lions
in muslim traditions the women must be hidden away in full body coverings and secret harems to 'protect' them from men who don t have enough women to go around and tend to take them violently.
in polygamy, many times women are seen as chattel.
there is one society in china where the women control the households and share husbands, but the women are in control there and the men visit their wives separate houses. that might work, if you are willing to live in a female centric society.
Some would and some would not, but the point is people would be able and free to write their own legally enforceable marriage contracts and have whatever they wanted. Some bisexual couples may marry other bisexual couples and that would be ok; whatever keeps loving family together is good and what doesn’t should be replaced. Divorce hurts children, I have seen the effects for myself.Gob wrote:What sane man would want four wives though?
I disagree, that is not necessarily so assuming that the people involved are compatible and if not they should never engaged in the marriage in the first. As I see it, the main cause of divorce is the hot girl next door and lack of honor and commitment in society, especially in the north. Married in this country is ready a joke; a little experimentation can’t hurt anything. But at any Rate, it is time for the government to get out of the marriage business it no longer serves a purpose.wesw wrote:4 wives quadruples the chance for divorce in the family. of course you could just ban divorce.....
does not compute. try again.