Monogamy is unnatural

Monogamous marriages are unnatural. On this, I agree with the emailer below.

Now, behold these enlightening thoughts that I found in my inbox this morning:

Greetings Mr. Walsh,

I am a college professor, author, and researcher. It was obvious to me before you ever stated it that you are a man of little education and limited intelligence. Still, I commend your newfound fame and congratulate you on the enormous amounts of money you must be making.

[Five more sentences of insults and pretentious self-aggrandizement]

…You have become a hot topic in some of my classes and this very much worries me. It wasn’t until your name came up for a fifth time that I decided to investigate you. Your prose are rife with fallacies and Neanderthalic musings, so I could easily disembowel and discredit any part of it. But I’d like to concentrate on what seems to be your most common themes: heterocentricism and monogamism. Whether you’re writing about marriage, “stay at home moms,” abstinence, or any other “issue of the family,” you seem to think that there is only *one* way and only *one* sort of family.

The truth that either escapes you or frightens you too much to acknowledge is that the “monogamous heterosexual relationship” is a largely unattainable (and undesirable) myth. Sexual unions between humans are not meant to be permanent. As we evolve, so does our understanding of these truths. Monogamy is not simply unrealistic; it is unnatural. You do not find it often in the animal kingdom, and where you do it is generally born of an evolutionary necessity. The necessity of monogamy among humankind has evaporated. This is particularly true of men, who are simply not biologically fitted for the “one woman” life.

You could use your platform for good but instead you use it to make those in open and poly relationships feel subhuman. Beyond the latent racism and sexism in your writings, it is your constant reinforcement of archaic relationship models that really does the profoundest of damage. Before you jump to any conclusions allow me to tell you this: I am married. I’ve been married for 15 years and my wife and I both sleep with other people. We are honest about this, which makes our open relationship more healthy than “monogamous” relationships built on lies.

Judge my choices if you like, but when you inevitably cheat on your wife, and then continue to sermonize about the sacredness of monogamous unions, I will return the favor.

I don’t expect you to use this email as you seem to only respond to imbeciles and easy targets.

And here is what I wrote back to him:

Good Day Professor,

It will be a challenge to type this response to you, sir, while I tremble in the blinding light of your godlike intellect. Do you begin all of your lectures by reciting your resume and viciously cutting down your audience? If so, I can only hope that you don’t teach a communications class. But if you do, then I can tell you that I receive at least 20 emails a day from people who must be your students. They’ve taken your strategy to heart. You should be proud.

In any case, I will attempt to make a rebuttal, but I will first offer the disclaimer that I am not nearly smart enough to use phrases like “archaic relationship models” and “your prose are rife with Neanderthalic musings.” I also lack the power to magically create liberal buzzwords like “monogamism” out of thin air. No, my dear Professor, I am a humble man and I can only write in plain language, using words that, you know, exist.

Now, with my idiocy and your cerebral supremacy well established, let us commence with the discussion.

Monogamy.

Monogamy is “unnatural,” says the Professor. And he says this as a married man — or “married” man, I suppose. A married person who doesn’t believe in monogamy seems an awful lot like a Satanist in a church choir, or an existential nihilist performing lifesaving heart surgery. There’s a bit of a philosophical conflict of interest at work, wouldn’t you agree? In fact, I wouldn’t even bother to address such absurdity if it wasn’t becoming so widespread. What you people — you socially “progressive” academics — have realized is that you can not launch a salient attack against the ideals behind marriage, or abstinence for that matter, so instead you’ve decided to make the bizarre case that these things are somehow mythological. The more you say it, the more people believe it, and the more they believe it the more true it becomes. It’s a clever trick. You’ve succeeded, at least partially, in shouting at a reality until it disappears.

But there is SOME truth in what you say.

Monogamy is not natural. You’re right about that.

It’s supernatural.

It’s above our nature. It might not be realistic. Space flight isn’t realistic, either. If I wanted to be natural, I could live in a hole like a rodent, eat insects, and scamper from one mate to the next, until, after a life of nothingness, I die alone in the cold darkness, decomposing into the dirt without anyone ever noticing. That would be natural. It’s probably pretty realistic, too. So it is fortunate that I am a human being and I am given the chance to transcend the existence of a rat or a lizard. I have the opportunity to experience supernatural things like love, and sacrifice, and commitment.

You say that men are especially ill-suited for monogamy. We are not “biologically fitted” for it. What does that mean, Professor? Do you go about your day and, before deciding on any particular course of action, ask yourself if it is something you are “biologically fitted” to do? I would say we are biologically fitted to be rational beings. And, as rational beings, we are capable of attaining higher things. Monogamy and loyalty are higher things. But are they more difficult for men? I can’t fathom why that should be the case.

I have found a woman who will be with me until I die, even while my hair falls out and my skin shrivels and wrinkles, even when I stumble, even when I fail, even through the doldrums of daily existence, through bills and dirty diapers, through all things — joyous or miserable, pleasing or painful — through every day until death comes. Why should it be hard for me to simply refrain from tossing such a gift into the garbage?

It’s hard for men to be monogamous? What a cowardly, pitiful statement. Also, how incredibly obtuse. It ought to be easy for us. Especially for us.

If you won 600 million dollars in the lottery, would you go out the next day and break into cars to steal the change from the cup holders? That’s what sleeping around is like when you’ve already found a woman who will pledge her life and her entire being to you for the remainder of her existence.

You tell me that you are in an “open marriage.” I will probably be lambasted for “judging” you for it, but, sorry Professor, an “open marriage” makes about as much sense as a plane without wings or a boat that doesn’t float. Marriages, by definition, are supposed to be closed. Actually, I’m getting rather tired of people like you trying to hijack the institution, strip it of its beauty and purpose, and convert it into some shallow little thing that suits your vices.

If you aren’t strong enough to stay committed to one person, that’s your business. Walk down that path of loneliness and confusion, but you can’t drag the entire institution of marriage along with you. Personally, I like circles but I hate squares. Can I subvert the laws of geometry and suddenly decide that all squares shall henceforth be circles? No, because geometry is geometry, despite my strange square-hating quirks. Similarly, marriage is marriage, no matter how many college professors insist otherwise.

All that said, I must agree with one of your assertions: I only respond to imbeciles.

Thanks for writing.

-Matt

******

Find me on Facebook.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2,191 Responses to Monogamy is unnatural

  1. jamspage says:

    Our (sin) nature is to not be with just one person. God said to do it – we obey and are blessed. THAT is IT in a nutshell.

    • Marie says:

      I love this, and everything Matt said… in fact, I have loved about everything ive read in Matt’s blog. Good job people, keepin it real. OH, and as for unattainable? Ive been married and faithful to a faithfilled husband for almost 19 years, and ive loved him and have been faithful to him for 21 years. He is my one and only, and he loves only me. No doubt our college professor will say he is lying to me or I am lying to myself, but guess what, im not and hes not. Its called fidelity, and love and KNOWING that you are with the RIGHT one, so why bother to keep “shopping around”?

      • Marie says:

        also, professors like this are why im encouraging my children to complete their educations online.

  2. Doug Acuna says:

    Once again–brilliant!!!

  3. Shelley says:

    LOL!! First thing that popped in my head when he said “You only respond to imbeciles” was “Matt’s about to prove you right buddy…” LOL

  4. smokie0730 says:

    Reblogged this on Somewhere in Texas and commented:
    I couldn’t have said it better. Nothing against my friends who have been divorced but this just plain old awesome.

    • Linda says:

      For people who are divorced because of adultery, it is something against them, and rightly so. But we can still treat our friends who are in that situation with love, while we stick to the truth of what God said marriage is supposed to be, and I’m referring to all aspects of marriage.

  5. smokie0730 says:

    Thanks Matt. I am sick and tired of the excuses these people come up to make for their actions and less than faithful selves. I am shouting loud and long that I will be faithful to my wife till my dying days!!

    • Linda says:

      If a man loves his wife as Christ loved the church, then a wife will be happy to submit to her husband as the leader of her and their children as God intended them to. It can be a relief to a woman to be married to a loving leader who is looking to God for guidance because he knows his own weaknesses; and it can be a relief to a man to have a supportive, loving wife who is willing to tell him what’s bothering her when she sees danger signals in his life. A married couple is one in God’s sight, not two separate people, each looking for his or her own fullfilment. They are looking for team fulfillment. This is what makes a lifelong marriage happy instead of a miserable institution that one partner can hardly wait to get out of.

      • Dwayne says:

        My thoughts exactly, they are nothing but licensed housemates. Another reason why the government should be involved with licenses and not be involved with the act of marriage.

    • micahdameron says:

      I second that Mr. Smokie, I am in the same boat and am very proud to be putting my natural “non-monogamous” desires to death for the safety and well-being of my wife, and for the happiness of my father.

  6. timurlane says:

    Absolutely brilliant verbal repartee, and spot on with your insight.

  7. jenscarlett says:

    The scariest part about his entire letter is that he is a “professor” – that people actually pay money to be lectured and “taught” by this idiot. Sad, very sad!

    • Mark says:

      Sadly he is one of many reprobates that adhere to such a belief. Merely an attempt to justify their own lust.

  8. Lorrie says:

    You, Sir, use words like a razor sharp sword! Very, very, very well said!!!

  9. Liz says:

    I realize this is an old post, but just for the hell of it…there are some animals I’m the animal kingdom that do, in fact, mate for life. This professor is definitely, as you put it, progressive …and quite a jerk.

  10. Leonid says:

    You, Matt Walsh, are a genius!

    • Total agreement Linda. Marriage was created by God and shows our commitment to both our spouses and to God. If you are openly sleeping with other people while in marriage then really what you are is roommates. And not very good ones at that. People can justify this behavior any way they want, but that will not magically make it right. God’s guideline are very specific so there will be consequences. The truth is, if you are lucky enough to find the kind of love it takes for marriage you would not have to justify this behavior. Linda, someone was or will be lucky enough to find you and your Natural believe and understanding of the institution of marriage.Personally, fulfillment comes when both strive to become one in thought, spirit and body. Marriage is not about the man and not about the woman. It is about the commitment to leave all behind including Gender (Matt), and becoming true and equal partners in the eyes of God, yourselves, the community and more importantly, your children. Who deserve only the best example.

  11. Marie says:

    I have had many of a smug, arrogant, superfluous adjective user professors like this one. I think my eyes rolled at least 3-4 times in his self grandizing opening paragraph. The best quote from this blog “If you won 600 million dollars in the lottery, would you go out the next day and break into cars to steal the change from the cup holders? That’s what sleeping around is like when you’ve already found a woman who will pledge her life and her entire being to you for the remainder of her existence.”

  12. Wayne says:

    Classic! Keep up the good work. No better way to silence your critics than to prove them right…:-) Blessings!

  13. James Marler says:

    Time to gush: I love everything you write. Also, “I only respond to imbeciles” was the perfect closer.

  14. Brilliant response, Matt! LOVE it. God bless you

  15. Rachael says:

    Just an honest question…where is the Biblical precedent for monogamy? I know Adam and Eve were obviously created as a monogamous couple (not much choice there), and the part about elders only having one wife…but there doesn’t seem to be any clear-cut command, and it seems like many or most of the biblical characters had more than one wife, and/or concubines. I’ve also heard people say you can see the trouble polygamy caused in the lives of men in the Bible, so it’s just unwise, but not a command. It doesn’t seem to be a cut and dry issue. I’d like to hear your view, if you’d be willing to share. Thanks!

    • Leah says:

      Hi Rachael,
      This a very great and important question that I think a lot of people are afraid to ask. I’ll do my best to answer with what I believe to be truths from the Bible. In Genesis 2:24, God himself is speaking and says that “A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” From the beginning, God says A man and A woman shall be united. Not A man and lots of women or a women and lots of men. First, let me address the Old Testament relationships. There are more examples of multiple wives or concubines here. In the life of Abraham, he had one wife named Sarah. God promised Abraham that he would have a son, and that his offspring would be as numerous as the stars. (Gen. 15:4-5) He was old, as was his wife Sarah. So she took it upon herself to make this covenant, a promise from God himself to man, happen. She gave her husband a concubine, and she got pregnant. In the culture of the day, wives were looked upon more as a possession rather than a life partner. Women had no rights, and if they wanted to be taken care of, they married. Then Sarah became angry with Hagar the concubine and sent her away. That was not how God wanted it. Even though Ishmael (Hagar’s baby) was a son of Abraham, Isaac was the son whom God chose to bless His people through.
      I’ll skip ahead to David, the one called a man after God’s own heart. David was a mighty warrior, strong and able to defeat his enemies. He married is wife Michel. He eventually took more wives. On a day when his army was in battle and he was at home, he saw Bathsheba and decided that he wanted her, too. So he took her, eventually killing her husband to hide his mistake. You see, God never once in the entire Bible says that having more than one wife is OK. He allows people to make their own choices, good or bad. Many people in the Bible took more wives, but there was always problems attached to it. The people of God were called to be set apart from the world, different, not the same. That is God’s way. The people of God saw what other people had, and it looked good, so they wanted it, too. The same way today that followers of Jesus are called to be set apart, different, not the same (2 Timothy 2:21), we see what the culture has, and it looks good, and we may want it. Just as with any sin, the first time you do it, it feels wrong. You may feel a little embarrassed. But you do it again, and the bad feeling doesn’t feel as strong. As you continue to do what you want to please yourself, it becomes less and less wrong feeling until one day you can justify it and say that no, what I’m doing is perfectly acceptable. You can often give good and compelling reasons why you should keep doing what you’re doing. You may even feel like things are working out for the best your way. And maybe they are. But regardless of what you think is best or easiest or most convenient, or what seems like good timing, if it doesn’t line up with what the Bible says, with what God says, it is not his will and it is not what he wants for you. He will still let us do them because we have the ability to make our own decisions. We have the choice to do what He wants (which often times seems harder and not as beneficial), or do it our own way. But I can say from experience that when you finally do what He says, when you are obedient to the Bible, the peace that comes from that is so much better and freeing than anything you can think on your own.
      Now I’ll focus on the New Testament. The idea of marriage is not something that man would think up. It is a reflection of the union between Jesus, the perfect, sinless Son of God who was slaughtered to take our punishment for our sins and the church. The Biblical sense of the word church does not mean any one specific denomination or building or congregation as it can today in our society, but as one, collective group of followers and those who have accepted the saving power of the spotless Lamb Jesus. It is between Jesus and his bride (the church), not brides. (See Revelation 19:7) The one collective group. I urge you to do some study on the bride of Christ. God actually does command us to be monogamous in marriage. Hebrews 13:4 says, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.” I know that some will say that this is intolerant, but I have news for you: God is intolerant of things he says are wrong. But that’s another discussion for another day. Jesus is the perfect bridegroom, in that he is always, always faithful. Hebrews 13:5 says that, “I will never leave you or forsake you.” The word forsake means abandon, desert, to give up. He will never abandon you. He will never give up on you! Can I get an AMEN?! For all the wrong I do, He loves me and will never ever leave me. With that kind of love, it is hard for me to NOT want to be faithful only to Him. That is what earthly marriage is to be about. Unconditional love for someone who very often times does not deserve it. Even though there is no possible way that I can earn it or that I deserve it, I want to be faithful and not disappoint that love. And since you are either for God or against him, as it says in James 4:4 “You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” It says that whoever wishes. That means it is a choice we make ourselves. I certainly do not wish to be an enemy of God! So let the world do as they will, but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

    • Just check out what Paul says in the epistles and read the book of Hebrews. You should find a lot of your answers there:)

    • My intent is definitely not to sound like a “know it all” but might I suggest reading the epistles? Oh and reading the book of Hebrews:) I think a lot of your answers might be found there.

    • nnorthquest says:

      This URl highlights many Biblical passages that will help answer your question about this issue:

      http://creation.com/does-the-bible-clearly-teach-monogamy

    • Todd says:

      Actually, though not popular, if we are honest, we have to admit that the Bible does neither teach, nor command, monogamy. David, the only man ever described as a man after God’s own heart, was never once admonished by God for the sin of polygamy. If God felt it was sin, is it reasonable to think that God would have called him out on it? Of course, since God did call him out on other sins.
      Also, throughout scripture, it is clear that multiples of many things indicate God’s blessing. Does it naturally follow that multiple wives would be an indication of God’s blessing? No. However, when you look at the life of Solomon, the wisest and wealthiest man that ever lived, we see that he had hundreds of wives- which could help account for some of that wealth. With multiple wives who respect each other and work together, a man can have a much more productive and happier home. He can also have more children which are always considered a blessing from God.
      When studied out, adultery almost always applies to women, and only applies to men when in reference to marrying an adulterous woman. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that polyandry (multiple husbands) is always wrong, but polygamy (multiple wives) is not. Of course, if a man swears an oath to his wife that he will be faithful to her and her alone, then he is bound by his oath and would be wrong to violate it by marrying another. Also, if a man desires to be an elder or deacon in a church, then he must be the husband of only one wife; but if he is fine with not being leadership in the church, multiple wives appears to be acceptable from a Biblical perspective.

      • JSantorelli says:

        @Todd: In the Old Testament, God tolerated a lot of our garbage probably because we were too spiritually immature to understand much. For instance, Moses allowed divorce at will however Jesus tells us that it really wasn’t God’s will. “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.” Mark 10:5 Yet, at no point before Christ was this issue every raised.

        Polyanything is the same deal. It was tolerated in the Bible because the alternative for a woman in those days was prostitution. It was better for a woman to be provided for and be 1 of many wives than it was for her to be a prostitute. Sad but true. One of the stipulations for polygamy (even in Islam today) the woman must be provided for and have her needs met so it wasn’t just some free for all orgy.

      • DYLAN says:

        Todd, it’s rather obvious that your strange conclusions come from a severe lack of understanding of the Scriptures. Regarding King David, are you really not aware that he was strongly rebuked for taking Bathsheba as another wife and that their first child together was not allowed to survive as a result? Regarding Solomon, are you really not aware that Scripture records that it was his many wives which enticed him away from Yahweh, even after Yahweh had warned him not to accumulate wives for himself? If you’re going to use the Scriptures as a starting point for understanding marriage, you have to recognize that the fundamental picture of marriage from Scripture is “two becoming one”…in other words, the two give all of themselves to each other and for each other. A man cannot give all of himself to multiple woman. The picture of polygamy that you are painting here is one in which it is a construct that explicitly benefits the man. It is undeniably a selfish construct at its very core. And because it is fundamentally selfish, it can not and does not stand the test of time. I challenge you to show me a single example of a polygamist society that has achieved any kind of social stability. Marriage on the other hand is fundamentally self-less, which is the reason it has always stood the test of time and resulted in the most stable societies. Finally, your comments about elders and deacons misses a vital principle. Elders and deacons were to be selected based on their being able to serve as examples for those they were responsible for. Just as Christ is the supreme example for the Church and the husband of but one bride, elders and deacons were to model Biblical marriage for all believers under their care. In a cultural context where polygamy was fairly common, it would most likely have been implicit that all believers should strive for what was modeled for them in their leaders, even if there was no explicit command recorded. If you were to honestly examine the whole of Scripture in this issue, you would certainly arrive at a different conclusion that what you stated above. Please do yourself and everyone else a favor and get rid of some of your presuppositions before trying to make definitive statements about things like this.

  16. Vinny says:

    His Holiness Sir College Professor, Author, and Researcher must teach an outdoor class because there’s no way that ego could fit through a man-made door.

  17. SUZ. says:

    I admit it; I’m a serial monogamist.

  18. Jenny Gremm says:

    When I hear or read such drivel from someone who obviously thinks WAY too highly of himself, I wonder why such a person is so incapable of understanding choice. The people who are pro abortion seem to think that they have coined the word, but in actuality, those who feel that they cannot control their base thoughts and desires and can only think of their own selves are to be pitied instead of celebrated. Is it unnatural to remain celibate or faithful to one person? If one is hedonistic I guess not, but if one is actually operating in free choice of course it is. It’s like the Muslim men (obviously again some not all) who claim that if a woman is showing any of her body or face she is asking to be raped. Whatever happened to self control? If someone says that they are just operating by their base natures they are actually saying that they are weak…they are too weak to control that which even a small child who is potty training can master…they can control themselves. Yes professor…you may be able to spin words to sound like you are intelligent, but what you are saying is that you are a weak excuse for a man!

  19. jeshkahopepe says:

    “All that said, I must agree with one of your assertions: I only respond to imbeciles.” Brilliant.
    That is a fantastic post and response to his email. An “open marriage” has always seemed an oxymoron to me and I appreciate your point of view on this topic. Thanks!

  20. Mel says:

    So weary of the background noise in this country! This country is full of people whining because they are either: just plain lazy, trying to justify lifestyles, trying to avoid accountability for their behavior, or looking for attention via ridiculous and unsubstantiated causes! Commenting on monogamy when you have an “open marriage”, really? How pompous or ignorant do you have to be to think that just because you can’t be bothered to maintain monogamy, it is somehow unattainable for the entire rest of the world? As long as there are people living without accountability to a “higher power” we doomed to be annoyed with background noise from self absorbed whiners who can’t see beyond themselves and their own interests.

    • mommyx4boys says:

      I completely agree with you. i hate that this is what our country is becoming. americans use to be strong, hard working , and moral. Its sad how people are acting now.

    • russ says:

      unfortunately it isn’t a requirement to morality to be religious, but somehow people see it as such, and those that are self proclaimed non-religious do everything they can to avoid appearing as such. Many cultures that don’t have religion or are pagan have almost identical moral compasses to the major religions of the world and hold to them better. This is all about learning to be a decent human being and this strange and frankly misguided divide makes it difficult to find people that are pillars in non religious circles to teach it without fear of appearing to be religious. So now we have droves of growing populations corrupting what it means to be decent, honest, honorable, and reasonable. If we could all forget who prescribes to what philosophy in life and decide to accept others as human beings we can start to remember what respect and moral fiber actually means outside of those philosophies.

  21. What a brave new world we live in. Monogamy is unnatural, but Homosexuality is normal. They can have it. I will gladly continue to live in my monogamous, only woman I have ever had sex with, Fifty-one year old married for 19 years world, and I am content and will be until the day I die, and your professor can kiss my *** if he thinks I will ever be unfaithful to my beloved. It ain’t gonna happen.

  22. SawlFamily says:

    absolutely brilliant response!

  23. chacha says:

    Marriage is for two.. (ex: adam and eve. Not adam, eve, eves sister, her mama, the neighbor). Why get married once if you don’t stop there? People are not forced to get married anymore, so really why bother to marry once, if you cant be faithful. And as for history, and the men with mistresses. That doesn’t make it right. Some history is to learn from, not live by. Those men resorted to animal instincts for their fulfillment of sexual urges. Yeah we are all human, people make mistakes. But our intelligent species can determine between right and wrong. Obviously they knew it was wrong, b/c those mistresses were not their wives, and often kept in secret. And I’m sure their wife was not OK with this and giving her consent. Also.. there are other species in the animal kingdom that do live momogamously. And “nature” has them do it, without arguing the issue. Thank you Matt, for giving hope to young people, that there are still people who believe in the values of marriage. As adults, we teach our children by example. And before anyone considers condemning my comment, ask yourself this.. what are you teaching your children?

    • Jemoess says:

      How sinful was David, then, seeing as he was allowed more then one partner. Or Solomon, who had concubines. Or Abraham, who, by the laws set out by God, took his wife’s maid to bed.
      Polygamy should never be used as an excuse to cheat on your partner. Monogamy is achievable and realistic. But it’s not the one and only way to have a healthy relationship.

  24. Kelia says:

    WOW! wow wow wow. I’m trained to speak to kids from grades 6-12 on saving all sexual activity for marriage, having one marriage partner for life, how to build a healthy relationship, other things. Many others in the group speak from the same curriculum…. We each tell our own stories or thoughts that can stick with the kids and parents/teachers. You, sir, have really spoken far better than the professor (obviously) and said something I will not forget: “If you won 600 million dollars in the lottery, would you go out the next day and break into cars to steal the change from the cup holders? That’s what sleeping around is like when you’ve already found a woman who will pledge her life and her entire being to you for the remainder of her existence.” With your permission, I’d like to include this in response to the next person who asks me why it’s not okay to sleep around. Very impressed with this post and now thinking:
    “Need to read the rest of the posts!”
    Brilliant responses, sir. FAVORITE. ^_^

  25. Fermin says:

    Matt, this is brilliant. The wonder of the simple, based-on-reason answer. Thank you for your great columns, keep it up ’cause you are outstanding in what you do. Greetings from Chile.

  26. Jason Hovde says:

    Galatians 5:22–23 (ESV)
    22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

  27. Melinda B says:

    Upon reading the bloated pontificating from the professor, my first thought-as is so often the case-was a quote from The Princess Bride: “Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.”

  28. Took that road 62 years ago,we got through the tough times with God’s Help,our Marriage was a great one ,we had 6 beautiful gifts from God now grown and living productive lives.My Joe returned home 4 years ago and oh what great memories I have of the wonderful life we shared.Matt take it from an old lady,you are always RIGHT ON!

  29. I always have the urge to yell “Burn!” at the top of my lungs after reading one of these letters.

  30. Natalie says:

    Know how to tell who in a crowded room is employed as a college professor? They will tell you. Does it drive anyone else nuts when college educators believe every word they utter is gospel truth? Any idiot can stand in front of an audience and sell his opinions as facts. Thanks, Matt, for responding to this imbecile. Wouldn’t it be nice if, one day, higher education didn’t mean taking out a second mortgage to inundate our adult children with political propaganda?

  31. Janis says:

    The ultimate plan of Satan is to extinguish all human life. Every culture in every generation sees this plan being carried out. It is people like this unfortunate educator that contribute to the twisted minds of our youth and support Satan’s plan. Thanks Matt for the work you do in straightening peoples thinking. I don’t see how, after reading your response, this professor could deny that you are right.

  32. Hannah says:

    I think the professor had a point (though he was too verbose and more than a bit rude). There is more than one way to live a happy life with someone you love. (:

  33. Tony says:

    It’s all the Pantological Heresy: He can’t keep his pants on! It is no more noble or intellectually profound than that. Amidst all of their wealth, these secular hedonists are bored, bored to death, so bored that they can’t imagine the beauty of fidelity and purity. No, they have to go thrill-seeking, just as some people take drugs to stave off the sense that their lives mean nothing. That motivates his wrath against you. You are saying, “Those people over there are doing something wicked, and are destroying themselves and the common good in the process. They are drinking a solution of sulfuric acid.”

    So it’s come to this, that we have to chuck our faith, our liberty, the common good, the welfare of children, our commitment to the sanctity of marriage and of human life, and even the old pagan philosophers, not to mention Jesus, just because some people cannot keep their pants on, having nothing else to give the illusion of meaning to their lives.

    It reminds me of what Chesterton said. He didn’t think it was any curtailing of his liberty to be limited to one woman — when he was still amazed that there was such a thing in the world as a woman at all, and one for him, too! Teddy Roosevelt had a trenchant comment of his own. He said that a man who would pretend to love more than one woman was as much to be trusted as a man who would pretend to be devoted to more than one country. Traitors both.

  34. SPR says:

    Funny how he accuses you of engaging in fallacy and then immediately commits the naturalistic fallacy.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

  35. Crickett Fuller says:

    Very well done. Thank you.

  36. Amanda says:

    AWESOME!!!!!!! Imbecile indeed 🙂

  37. Rachael says:

    I liked the general message of you response to The Professor, whose title begs that he becomes your arch nemesis, but it would have been nice if you hadn’t stooped to his level. I image you got a lot of enjoyment out of cleverly insulting him, however I didn’t. It didn’t sound like you actually cared about this man or his view point but that you just want to defend your honor and make an interesting blog post. That is why, this time around, you lost me.

  38. finishstrongdoc says:

    “Them who can, do; them who can’t, teach.”
    Keep up the great work, Matt.

  39. Racheled says:

    A wonderful response, Matt! I particularly like the lottery/change cup analogy. Thank you!”

  40. JSantorelli says:

    There was a blog not to long ago by a South Carolina professor who went by the moniker “Professor Polyamory.” He was quite a disturbing individual. I wonder if this letter was from him.

  41. Abi says:

    Your responce to the professor who said that “marraige is unnatural” was really well worded and very encouraging. It is increasingly difficult to have this feelings and not be looked at sideways it would seem. I think it is more because people with liberal views are more forceful about it and then the majority just don’t say anything.

    So, thank you for writing with honesty and clear words because I don’t feel like I am alone about this anymore. I am not the only one that will say monogamy isn’t just a fairy tale and that’s worth a lot.

  42. analyticalperspective says:

    I feel love for the sentiments of this post. Matt, you and your wife will be together “until death do you part.”

    As for the professor, he is hurting on a fundamental, psychological level. I don’t need to know the details of his tortured childhood and adolescence to know that he is harboring a profound pain that is skewing his judgment. His statements are truly piteous and I make this statement with compassion.

    Don’t hate this man, this professor, in any fashion. Don’t harm him with scorn and loathing for he is suffering enough already.

  43. Virginia Acuna says:

    Score! The professor is a complete boob (sorry for insulting a boob!)

  44. Pingback: Monogamy is unnatural (Says the imbeciles) | codybilleck

  45. Toni says:

    Narcissism is so overrated. 😉 Keep up the good work, Matt!

  46. Jennifer H. says:

    My first thought in response to the professor’s rant: Monogamy means not being at risk for certain life-threatening diseases. How is that evolutionarily inferior? Sure, we no longer have babies blinded by syphilis, but we still don’t have a cure for AIDs. Drug-resistant forms of STIs are emerging. Monogamy still makes a lot of sense for this species.

  47. Mike W says:

    The professor personifies the best description of “rationalization” that I ever heard; “bringing your level of expectation down to your level of performance.”

  48. Thank You Matt! Makes me sick to think that people like him a “Professor,” is “Teaching.” I pray I can teach my children to know right from wrong, regardless of imbecile educators.

  49. I just love your response. Thanks for sticking up for what you believe!

  50. David Zink says:

    Matt, good job.

Comments are closed.