Saturday, January 07, 2006

Trinogomous Hell.

The Miami Herald (where else?) considers three in the sack.

Sartre was all over this.

Note: I have modified this post. I really find the Herald article to be quite interesting. Its about a documentary and about the film maker - and about the subject of the documentary, the "trinogomous" relationship that went on for years and produced, apparently, at least one child, but finally broke up. Does the documentary necessarily invite emulation; does the newspaper article? If they invited emulation, then they are morally reprehensible. What we watch, what we read, what we listen to, where we spend our time, will tend to conform us to what we perceive. That's why we want to meditate on God's law, day and night. That's why we want not to walk in the way of the counsel of the wicked.

This kind of article makes the Herald's editorial policy so despicable. The Herald is in a unique and powerful position to build up, but it seems ever to tear down.

As to the demerits of the case presented in the article, is there a difference between "serial" polygomy and "trinogomy"? At least the former affirms the idea of one male/one female, while undercutting it with the temporal nature of the mariage/divorce/marriage cycle. "Trinogomy" simply ignores the natural state of things.

No comments: