Evils of polygamy and benefits of heavy duty brakes.

The idea, floated with ever greater frequency, is that polygamy is nothing objectionable; it is simply another option on our diverse menu of family types. A new HBO series called "Big Love," debuting in March, will center on a man married to three women. "It's everything that every family faces, just times three," co-creator Mark Olsen told Newsweek. "The yuck factor disappears and you just see human faces."

Mr. Olsen is articulating the progressive view of polygamy, trying to make it part of a liberationist project that began, if not with Brook Farm, then with the 1960s. According to this view, social conventions like monogamy inhibit free expression, not least in the sphere of erotic desire. Busting such conventions is thus a forward-looking task.

But is it? Leaving aside the social habits of the Dutch--always a good thing to do--polygamy today is most popular in cultures that are relatively backward and impoverished. ^[1]

To appreciate the true horror of polygamy (and its attitudinal handmaidens), Jon Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven [review] is a must read.

It is a dangerous thing indeed to countenance stepping too far off the well-trodden trail blazed by custom and tradition as we follow the Natty Bumpo of "personal choice."

One gentleman observed (on XM satellite Radio we seem to recall) that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders used to list homosexuality as a mental disease whereas now it is so-called homophobes who are considered to be mentally disturbed. (We haven't checked this out in the DSM ourselves.)

Hollywood Culture now treats homosexuality as a sacrament when it is probably at heart a personal catastrophe of the first order. Homosexual marriage is simply another assault on the traditional family.

We would be better to indulge less wildly in the social experimentation that is endemic to the Western world (e.g., celebration of homosexuality, promoting single parenthood, promoting the feminization of men, deChristianization of the culture). The Colonel is definitely one of those conservatives who would stand athwart history and yell "stop" for the simple reason that he believes that it is frequently difficult for individuals to know the truth. The experience of others is thus not to be cast aside lightly, even when historical practices are less than perfect.

In a different arena, a new phenomenon -- "multiculturalism" -- crept into the thinking of many well educated idiots with the result that we have casually allowed into our culture vast numbers of people who have no intention of honoring its traditions or its legal structure. Such momentous events in history were heretofore achieved by military invasion and occupation.

We should be more vigilant to protect against those from both within and without the culture who would subvert its essential values.

Notes
^[1] "Harem, Scare 'Em. Worrying about polygamy". By Naomi Schaefer Riley, De Gustibus, OpinionJournal, 1/6/06.