Monogamy: Unrealistic? Unnatural?

I research a lot around the internet and since I blog and write about marriage, dating, and relationships, I often run into secular or atheistic beliefs with regards to these topics.  I also run into a lot of “Christian” websites that miss the mark on Christ’s messages by leaps and bounds.  I’ve seen a lot of scorn for monogamy lately.  I’ve also seen a lot of indifference or outright acceptance of polygamy.  I’ve also seen people backing polygamy, because, “Well,” they say, “it’s in the Bible.”  So, I started to research things and I quickly became overwhelmed, because, quite frankly, this is not a neat and tidy topic.  I started writing this and got stuck, because I just didn’t know where to begin, what to touch on, and what to research.  I about gave up, but before I did I sat down in prayer and asked for some guidance.  I told God that this was a messy, involved topic and I just didn’t know what to do to really start exploring this.  The answer came:  Break the topic up.  Don’t try to condense this all into one blog.  Take your time to weed through and research.  Explore.  I instantly felt relief and refreshed.  Later that day, my husband came and said to me, “You know, I think I know the answer to this problem with this monogamy blog.  You need to break it up.”  I smiled at him and said, “Yep, I think that’s the answer.”

So, in this first blog, I’m going to look at some very basic claims.  This is just the first step and there are a lot more facets to this that can’t be covered all in one blog.  I think we have all heard these at some time in our lives.  I’ve tried to take the St. Thomas Aquinas approach and state the claim, look at the evidence, and then logically present a finding.

Claim:  Monogamy is unrealistic and unnatural.  Monogamy is a religious ideal pressed upon humans.  We find in the animal kingdom monogamy, polygamy, and same-sex activities and humans are animals, too.  Abraham in the Bible was a polygamist, so even the “Father of the Jews” practiced it. 

I will try to analyze each of these claims and offer a response.

1. Monogamy is unrealistic.

Unrealistic:  not having or showing a sensible and practical idea of what can be achieved or expected.

Is it unrealistic to believe monogamy is possible?  We would have to answer “no” to this based on the fact that literally thousands, if not millions and millions have lived monogamous marriages.  What would be unrealistic is to say that a human has a realistic expectation of marrying an alien.  We have never seen aliens and therefore it is not reasonable or practical to believe alien marriage is realistic.  Monogamous marriages have been lived and achieved throughout history.  To say that monogamy is unrealistic is to say that it isn’t even practical to think it could happen.

Finding:  Monogamy is not unrealistic based on the fact that millions of people have lived it.

2. Monogamy is unnatural.

Unnatural:  Contrary to the laws or course of nature.

Monogamy is focused around two people who are choosing to be committed to each other, that is, not to have another sexual partner entered into the equation.  This can be within a marriage or not in a marriage.  Many proponents of getting rid of monogamy look to the fact that there are animals (non-humans) that have multiple partners and therefore polygamy is natural.  If we are going to go by this argument, then we have to point out that monogamy is also found in the animal kingdom.  Therefore, the only real argument to be made is that both monogamy and polygamy are natural in the animal kingdom.  But, you can’t say, monogamy is unnatural.  If nothing else, both situations bring about new life, which is a very natural thing.  Male and female body parts naturally fit together to create new life.

But, just because something can be done, doesn’t mean, for humans, it should be.  Animals are known to eat feces, eat bugs off each other, eat their young, and even kill their mates after mating.  Just because the animal world does something does not, in fact, point to the way things should be done for humans.  What’s natural for monkeys, is not necessarily natural for human beings.  It’s natural for male lions to lie around and allow the females do all the work, but I certainly don’t see us making the case for this as a positive thing for humans to do.  One could argue, that, hey, it’s good and right for women to be servants to men, because the lions do it.  Obviously, that is utter nonsense and I hope no one would seriously make that argument.  The problem is, is that we can’t take just one thing (such as polygamy) and say that because the animal kingdom does it, it’s good and right for us, too.  You simply can’t just select and pick which things you want to adopt from the animal kingdom and validate your claim using that one example.  “Well the animals do it, so it’s okay for us to do, too.”

The argument that will most likely be made is one where someone says, “Well, it’s unrealistic for me.  Maybe you can do it, but I don’t find it realistic for my life.”  I’ll cover this in another blog.  This takes a lot of time to delve into and I’m trying to focus on the very basics here.

Finding:  The animal kingdom argument only tells us that monogamy and polygamy are naturally found in the animal kingdom, but cannot be extended to assert that monogamy and polygamy are right and natural for the human race.

3.  Humans are animals, too.

I feel like I covered most of this in the second section.  Yes, humans are classified as mammals in the animal kingdom.  We do, though, sit at the top of the charts.  We are the most intelligent, have the use of reason and free will.  All of these things set us apart.  I’m not sure why the most intelligent and advanced species uses animals with lesser capabilities to justify a behavior.  It should stand that we can deduce what is right and just.  We don’t have to just lazily give ourselves passes for bad behavior, because, oh well, we are just humans–no better really than a rhino, or a lizard, or a starfish.  This is to diminish our intellect, creativity, moral compasses, and self-discipline.  To say polygamy is fine because animals do it, is to essentially say that we have no control whatsoever over ourselves and we just work off of instinct and survival.  It’s natural for dolphins to hold their breathe for very long periods of time, it’s not natural for humans.  It’s natural for lions to only eat meat, but it’s not natural for deer.  There are things that are natural to certain animals that are not natural to other animals.  We can’t make the mistake of saying that because humans are animals, that anything the animal kingdom does is right and natural for us, too.

I know what would be argued is that what is best for some humans is not what is best for other humans.  I will discuss this, but in an effort to keep things relatively short, I’ll cover the moral aspect in another blog.

Finding:  Yes, humans are animals, but we possess the ability to use our intellect in far superior ways than the rest of the animal kingdom.  And in this way, we can determine which type of marriage is best for humans. 

This, by no means, is an exhaustive look at monogamy.  This is just the tip of the iceberg.  I tried to first answer some of the most basic claims against it.  Here is my blog answering the Abraham claims.