27 Feb Non-Monogamy and Christianity: What the Bible Actually Says
Reading Time – 3 minutes
One of the most common objections I hear to non-monogamy comes from conservative, traditional, right-wing Christians. You see it constantly in online comments and emails:
“This isn’t Christian.”
“This is sinful.”
“I’d love to do this, but I’m a Christian.”
So, let’s slow this down and actually examine the claim, not emotionally, not culturally, but biblically.
Because what I teach about non-monogamy under the Alpha Male 2.0 model is, in fact, fully compatible with Christianity.
And yes, I can prove it.
Where, exactly, does the Bible command monogamy?
Not where your pastor implies it.
Not what your parents told you.
Not what modern Christian culture assumes.
Where does the Bible explicitly say that a Christian man must be sexually exclusive to one woman for life?
The answer is uncomfortable for a lot of people:
It doesn’t.
There are two verses that sort of refer to this—Corinthians 7:2 and Ephesians 5:31—and even those only imply pair bonding. They do not command lifelong sexual exclusivity. They do not outlaw multiple partners. They do not define monogamy as a moral requirement.
That’s it. Two implied references. No command.
If monogamy were a core Christian doctrine, you would expect it to be clearly stated, repeatedly reinforced, and strictly commanded.
Instead, what do we see?
The Bible contains over 37 clear examples of polygamy and references non-monogamous relationships well over a hundred times. Kings, patriarchs, prophets—men central to biblical history—had multiple wives and concubines. This wasn’t hidden. It wasn’t condemned. It was openly recorded.
So, let’s put this side by side:
- Explicit commands for monogamy: zero
- Implied references to monogamy: two
- Explicit references to non-monogamy: dozens
- Total mentions of non-monogamous structures: over a hundred
That alone should raise questions.
“It Was Described, Not Endorsed”
At this point, the usual counterargument appears:
“The Bible only describes polygamy historically. It doesn’t present it as the moral ideal.”
Fine. Let’s accept that argument for a moment.
Even if that’s true, the Bible still does not command monogamy either.
Which means Christians are not following a divine mandate when they insist on monogamy. They’re following a cultural tradition, not scripture.
Human beings added this rule later. Not God. Not Jesus. Not Moses. Not the Ten Commandments.
Modern Christianity quietly inserted lifelong sexual exclusivity as a requirement, even though it doesn’t exist as a command anywhere in the Bible.
At this point, many Christians mentally equate non-monogamy with promiscuity.
That’s the real issue.
When traditional Christians hear “non-monogamy,” they imagine:
- sleeping with hundreds of women,
- lying constantly,
- spreading disease,
- abandoning children,
- moral chaos.
Obviously that is not what I teach
Alpha Male 2.0 non-monogamy is structured, honest, and limited.
For most men, it looks like:
- one serious woman (MLTR or OLTR),
- one additional woman on the side (FB).
That’s it.
Two women. Sometimes three. Not ten. Not fifty. Not chaos.
If you believe two women equals promiscuity, then the word has lost all meaning.
Morality, Honesty, and Christian Compatibility
Let’s talk about ethics.
Alpha Male 2.0 models require:
- no lying,
- no deception,
- no leading women on,
- full disclosure of non-monogamy,
- treating women well,
- emotional responsibility,
- sexual responsibility.
There is nothing in Christianity that condemns honesty.
Nothing that condemns consensual adult relationships.
Nothing that condemns not lying.
In fact, those principles align better with Christian morality than the modern model of serial monogamy, cheating, secret affairs, and divorce.
If you are a Christian and you believe non-monogamy is sinful, you need to answer one question honestly:
Where does the Bible say that?
Not where a pastor told you.
Not what your church culture assumes.
Not what your parents believed.
If you can’t point to a clear biblical command, then you are enforcing a rule that human beings added later.
And once you admit that, the guilt disappears.
I am not promoting promiscuity.
I am not promoting chaos.
I am not promoting irresponsibility.
What I teach is structured, ethical, transparent, and historically consistent with Christianity.
If someone disagrees, they’re welcome to do so—but they should stop claiming the Bible as their justification unless they can actually show where it says what they believe it says.
Because when you look at the text itself, calmly and honestly, the conclusion is unavoidable:
Non-monogamy, as practiced under Alpha Male 2.0 principles, is not un-Christian.
AI did NOT write this article. The article comes 100% from me and is 100% my content. However, AI was used to transcribe this content from some of my other social media which is why the voice is a little different. It’s still 100% my content and not written by AI. AI will never “write” my content! Remember that you can always go to calebjonesblog.com and subscribe to my Substack if you want articles physically written by me with no AI involvement whatsoever.
Leave your comment below, but be sure to follow the Five Simple Rules.
glenn braunstein
Posted at 01:01 pm, 27th February 2026Caleb, I appreciate you pushing people back to the actual text instead of defaulting to inherited church assumptions. Once someone honestly examines how many named patriarchs, judges, and kings practiced polygyny without divine condemnation, the claim that monogamy is a clearly commanded Christian requirement starts to look more cultural than scriptural.
As I’ve read your books, I’ve consistently noticed that your position aligns far more closely with the actual biblical record and the created structure of man than most modern church teaching does. The structure you describe is not foreign to Scripture. It mirrors the historical reality of Israel far more than modern Western monogamy does.
I’ve written two books that address this directly.
The first is The Biblical Case for Polygamy. It works carefully through the biblical material itself, but it also deals with the legal definition of adultery, because that is where the confusion usually begins. In Scripture, adultery is not defined as “a married man having more than one woman.” It is defined as violating another man’s marriage covenant. Once you understand that legal category, polygyny and adultery stop being conflated. The book walks through the Hebrew and Greek terms, covenant law in Torah, and how later Christian tradition gradually reframed the narrative around lifelong sexual exclusivity. It’s available on Amazon under my name, Glenn Braunstein.
The second is Wrestling with Nature: Understanding Why Men Cheat on the Women They Love. That one approaches the issue from biology, psychology, and social conditioning. It explains male sexual wiring without defending dishonesty or irresponsibility, and it distinguishes structured, transparent non-monogamy from deception and chaos.
Both books are available on Amazon.
For Christians who want their convictions rooted in the text rather than tradition, definitions matter. Covenant law matters. If adultery is misdefined, then polygyny will automatically be misjudged. The starting point has to be what is actually written, not what later culture assumed.
Respect for bringing that discussion into the open.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:35 pm, 27th February 2026Sorry, Caleb, but you are just wrong here. Christianity is completely incompatible with alpha 2.0 teachings.
First, let me stick up for women here. The Bible demands lifetime sexual monogamy FROM WOMEN! In fact, if a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night, the Bible commands that she be stoned to death! If, during her marriage, she sleeps with any man other than her husband, same thing – death by stoning. Thus, under biblical teachings, every woman who has slept with more than one man in her entire life deserves the death penalty. The only exception is if she is widowed, in which case she can marry another, but if she marries another after a divorce while her ex is still alive, that’s adultery according to Jesus.
The Bible is clear – FOR WOMEN, it is sexual monogamy, celibacy, or death! BUT WOMEN DESERVE SEXUAL LIBERATION TOO! If women follow the Bible, they are guaranteed a lifetime of misery and sexual repression. Christianity always leads to slut shaming and the Madonna/whore complex. If she’s not a virgin on her wedding night, she’s a whore worthy of death according to the Bible!
It is NOT sex-positive to praise male non-monogamy while condemning it in the female! It is hypocritical trash! WOMEN DESERVE MANY MEN TOO! Those are actually my favorite women! Christian men saying to women, “I can, but you can’t.” That’s hypocritical and shameful! It’s all slut shaming!
Second, the Bible condemns fuck buddies and casual sex for both men and women, referring to it as “fornication” in the New Testament. According to the Bible, if a man and a woman have sex once, they are instantly engaged to be married, or she must become his concubine (serious girlfriend), and she must be monogamous to him!
CALEB PLEASE – Don’t say that this slut shaming garbage has any place in the alpha male 2.0 system. Let women be sexually liberated too without Christian men demanding their virginity and monogamy. Christianity, just like Judaism and Islam, is anti-women and anti-female sexuality. And even the man must either have multiple wives or multiple serious girlfriends (concubines), but if men have MLTRS or FBs, they are judged as fornicators and the New Testament demands that men “flee fornication.”
Conclusion – the Bible is anti-female sexual liberation and anti-male casual sex, demanding that women be virgins before marriage and that men only have wives and one way OLTRS. Let’s end the slut shaming by not endorsing slut shaming systems, okay?
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:32 pm, 27th February 2026No, it’s defined as a married woman having more than one man.
I’ve been with more than my fair share of married women. Nothing wrong with it. And there’s nothing wrong with two way open marriages and open relationships. There’s nothing wrong with cheating either, since monogamy doesn’t work.
Women have every right to be just as sexually liberated as men, but the bible denies them this, which is why they should reject the bible.
King Alex
Posted at 03:28 pm, 28th February 2026I’m with you 100% that the monogamy structure was meant to control the masses. However, how about: “You shall not commit adultery,” Exodus 20:14.
Adultery is generally defined as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone who is not their spouse.
This is old testament, so I’m also confused why men had so many wives back then and then this versicle is there.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:31 pm, 28th February 2026King Alex – In the Bible, adultery only meant that women aren’t allowed to sleep with anyone other than their one husband, and men aren’t allowed to sleep with other men’s wives. That’s it.
The Bible condemns female sexual liberation and demands that men financially take care of all their wives and concubines for life.. It prohibits casual sex for both sexes. This is because birth control had not yet been invented at the time, and neither were DNA paternity tests. So if having sex is the same thing as having children, and there is no way to be sure that the child a woman is carrying belongs to any one specific man, these rules made sense back then. Today, they are oppressive and inhibit freedom and happiness.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:56 pm, 28th February 2026Ok, Caleb likes receipts, so here they are. This is the Bible’s Old Testament book of Deuteronomy Chapter 22, Verses 13-21:
“If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her; And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days. But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.”
Now here is the Bible’s Old Testament Book of Exodus Chapter 22, verses 16-17, which prohibits casual sex::
“And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.”
The Bible is NOT compatible with a sex-positive lifestyle or with the alpha 2.0 life. There are also quotes from the New Testament prohibiting fornication (casual sex) and sex outside of marriage. If anyone wants me to quote those, let me know,
Caleb Jones
Posted at 10:28 am, 1st March 2026Yeah, that might be accurate. Good point. But for men it doesn’t, and I’m talking to men at this blog here.
Yet the Bible allows some of God’s favorite people (Abraham, etc) to have concubines, and God has no problem with it. Meaning that “adultery” in this contact might exclude concubines.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 07:42 pm, 1st March 2026.
I understand that. But you said it yourself – If a man has multiple women and then insists on all of those women being virgins when he first meets them, and demands that they fuck no one but him for their whole life, women in the western world will not tolerate such gender hypocrisy. And yet, that’s exactly the attitude that the Bible demands that you, as a man, have towards women.
You say you want to talk only to men? Fine. So instead of telling men that the alpha male 2.0 lifestyle is, in your words, “fully compatible” with the Christianity, tell men that the Bible’s demand for female “purity” is precisely incompatible with male happiness, because it requires men to police women, make sure they’re “sexually pure,” and prevent them from having sex lives outside of one man, while that one man gets to fuck around because he’s not a woman.
Women won’t allow such hypocrisy and policing women’s bodies like this is incompatible with a man’s happiness. Please tell them that.
But you have to know what a concubine is. A concubine lives with the man, is allowed to have sex with no one but him, and is financially and materialistically taken care of by the man, as well as the children she produces. In other words, she is a one way OLTR. The man can fuck around, but she can’t. The only difference is that they’re not officially married.
Also, the prohibition against adultery prevents women from fucking anyone other than their husband if they are wives or one master if they are concubines. And men aren’t allowed to fuck another man’s wife or concubine. The Bible requires you to take financial care of all the wives and concubines you’re sleeping with. Casual sex is prohibited, and even serious relationships in which women can fuck around too are prohibited.
Christianity is completely incompatible with male happiness as it requires men to police women and follow them around, and then stone them to death if they, in the Bible’s words, “play the whore.” But men can. No man who is a Christian can possibly be happy.
Caleb Jones
Posted at 05:19 am, 2nd March 2026You’re getting in the weeds, Jack. The point is that the Bible doesn’t directly command true monogamy, and God praises and loves many men who practice non-monogamy. If you want to deep dive on precisely the types of non-monogamy it allows and doesn’t allow, that’s a discussion for another time.
doclove
Posted at 12:33 am, 7th March 2026The early Christians picked up monogamous marriage as Christian Tradition of only one husband and one wife primarily from the Ancient Romans(Italians) and secondarily from the Ancient Greeks as Christianity was being formed. You can thank the Pagan maternal ancestors of Caleb Jones whose mother is of Italian and more specifically Sicilian descent. The Pagan paternal ancestors of Caleb Jones whose mother were Celtic Romano-Britons now known as the Welsh from Wales like most other people did not have monogamous marriage. The Ancient Pagan Celts let women divorce and leave their husbands more freely than most other cultures.
Most men are Betas so most of them want monogamous marriage. It is most Alpha men and most women who like the current paradigm of non monogamy. Monogamous marriage especially one that does not allow divorce and states that spouses owe each other sex on demand( with extremely rare exceptions) like the Catholic Church preaches is the best deal Betas are ever going to get. Orthodox Christianity and to a lesser Protestant Christianity come close to Catholic Christianity in this regard. Alphas like non monogamy because it means they get to have sex with more women than in the monogamous Catholic Christian past. Young women like this because they get their turn being on the Alphas’ booty call lists. Older women like it less because their turn becomes less frequent up to the point of being thrown off the Alpha men’s booty call lists. Jack Outside the Box made an incorrect statement about Beta men not wanting monogamy.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 02:44 am, 7th March 2026Well hello there, Doc! It’s been years!
In other words, a system of imprisonment in violation of human rights.
Yes, rape within marriage was shockingly allowed until the sexual revolution of the 1960s replaced marriage with consent as the socially and legally agreed upon precondition for sexual relations, thus finally criminalizing all rape, even rape within marriage. And you lament this change as…….A BAD THING??? Wow!
It was actually the sex-positive feminists of the 1970s that campaigned to broaden rape law to include an acknowledgement of the existence of rape even within marriage. This finally prohibited men from raping their wives. But the sex-positive movement (of which I am a part) knew that this would be controversial, because what are men supposed to do if the wife says no to sex? The answer that sex-positive feminists gave was open marriages, thus giving birth to modern day non-monogamy and the swinger scene. As Caleb wrote in his open relationship book, it was women in the 1990s who created the “modern woman” by combining 1950s style monogamy with the “don’t you dare tell me what to do with my body” attitude of the 1970s. Now, monogamy doesn’t work because it leads to the sexual frustration of the partner with the superior sex drive. The only other alternative besides polyamory is the re-legalization of marital rape, which, I would think, everyone agrees is morally unacceptable and a shocking violation of the woman’s human right to her own bodily autonomy.
Many women also have high sex drives and like the idea of sexual liberation combined with rape being a morally and legally unacceptable act in all circumstances.
I never said that. Where did I say that? Of course betas want monogamy. What I said was that monogamy is not conducive to male happiness or the aloha 2.0 lifestyle because Christianity requires you to make sure your woman is a virgin before your wedding night, and then you have to follow her around, tightly control her, and make sure that she never looks at another man. Such constant surveillance doesn’t work in the modern world and will eventually lead your woman to resent you. If you are cheating on her, that will especially make her want to….eliminate the double standard.
Obviously, betas want monogamy. I never said otherwise. But it’s not conductive to happiness for the above stated reasons in the western world in 2026. But the delusion of monogamy might work as a civilization stabilizer so that the beta workers don’t drop their tools and lead a communist revolution. We want them to continue working and living out their delusions, while we discreetly have sex with their girlfriends and wives. But the monogamous lifestyle is stressful and isn’t conducive to the happiness of aspiring alpha 2.0s. For aspiring alphas, we should encourage non-monogamy, or official monogamy with discreet cheating on the side, like I’m doing now. That’s all I meant. 🙂
doclove
Posted at 06:11 am, 7th March 2026Let me amend, correct and bring clarity to what I previously wrote today. Western Women on average want from most to least serial monogamy, non monogamy, and permanent monogamy. Western men without Disney programming naturally on average want from most to least non monogamy, permanent monogamy then serial monogamy.when they are young. However, as these men age, only the Alpha men on average. want from most to least non-monogamy, permanent monogamy then serial monogamy. The Beta men switch to order from most wanted to least wanted to permanent monogamy, non monogamy then serial monogamy because they realize that either they can not become Alphas or less likely don’t want to do so. Christianity especially Catholicism and to a lesser extent Orthodoxy then Protestantism permanent monogamy as their number one choice. I know that permanent monogamy is out as number three in the West and is unlikely to return to being number two and is least likely to return to number one in my lifetime; yet, I was born in 1968. Christianity and permanent monogamy was better than what we have now and what is coming overall for most people including most women especially as they got older as well as being extremely better for most men because they are Betas. Alphas benefit the most from non- monogamy. Women benefit the most from serial monogamy. Betas benefit the most from permanent monogamy. No pussy, no work. No pussy, no fight. And if a women will not appreciate, show gratitude and love for men then men will not work or fight either. A big part of the Western collapse is coming because too few Beta men are getting enough sex. Enjoy the decline.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 08:15 am, 8th March 2026CRINGE!!!!
Hence why the secret society needs to remain secret.
HELL YEAH!!!
No, they don’t. That’s what women want the most, but just because they want something the most doesn’t mean it benefits them. Non-monogamous open relationships are way better for both sides than monogamy, serial or otherwise.
I don’t know about benefit, but that is what they want, especially if they have the sex drives of penguins.
That’s why the seduction community was founded. To help these beta men adjust to the current world. This community is poised to save the world someday. Although it does have its limitations, which is why, like I said, the secret society shouldn’t be too open to betas, except those betas who are willing to become alphas and have an open mind. If not, they should stay in their monogamous bubbles while we discreetly fuck their women. Win/win.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:10 am, 13th March 2026Yo Caleb, I’ve been reading what’s happening in Dubai. Scary shit, man. Those wacky Muslims, am I right? Any chance you can post something just to reassure us that you’re ok? You still alive? I heard the airport got bombed. You okay, man?
Caleb Jones
Posted at 09:19 am, 14th March 2026Stop believing whatever the news tells you, Jack. Only 1 person in Dubai has died in the last 2 weeks, out of a city of 5 million people. I’m safer than you are.
https://www.calebjonesblog.com/p/iran-dubai-trump-and-everything-stop
https://www.calebjonesblog.com/p/final-dubaitrump-update-for-the-low
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 11:03 pm, 14th March 2026It’s just that you haven’t posted anything lately, combined with the fact that your country is getting bombed. So I just thought I’d ask. When’s the next blog post?
Caleb Jones
Posted at 05:07 am, 15th March 2026I’ve been really sick. Posting schedule returns next week.
Anonymous
Posted at 09:52 pm, 16th March 2026@ Jack Outside the Box
Your secret society is by far less of a secret than it used to be, and many more men especially if they are betas upon discovering it dislike it because they are beginning to realize how badly they have unjustly been mistreated and deceived by it. Some betas will be able to become betas, but most won’t no matter how hard and smart they try. I acknowledge that there is a large enough minority of betas who could be alpha,Caleb Jones aka Black Dragon stated over a decade ago that even under the most ideal conditions that Alphas would comprise no more than 50% of the male poulation which leaves at least the but they are unwilling to try. I stand by what I said earlier that Christianity when it was the operating system was a better system for beta men because no pussy -no work, no pussy -no fight and no love-no suffering until death do us part. Are you delusional or are you trying to gaslight me and other men.?
If you are delusional then you are lying to yourself and if you are not, then your lying is not successfully working on me. Caleb Jones aka Black Dragon stated over a decade ago that even under the most ideal conditions no more than 50% of men would be Alphas and at least 50% would be betas which he acknowledged would never happen. Lately he is saying that Alphas would be no more than 10% under the current conditions. As more men find out red pill truths and even worse yet black pill truths by abandoning blue pill lies, then the majority of men change from Beta 1,0s, functional betas to Beta 2.0s, dysfunctional betas. A minority of men become Alpha 1.0s, dysfunctional Alphas and a much smaller minority become Alpha 2,0s, functional Alphas. If you look and listen to men then you will see and hear this. The data and statistics reveal this even more.
Most women want serial monogamy with Alphas be they the dysfunctional or functional kind but realize that they can’t get it so settle for being in virtual harems. All Alphas .like this system better than the old Christian one or the old Beta supportive one even if it was some other belief system besides Christianity. The Betas justifiably dislike this because why would anyone support a system unjustifiably rigged severely against them. There is no fairness in the world and all systems are rigged to favor some people over others, but some are more just, fair and balanced then others, Europe and Australia are worse in inviting in immigrants who like to abuse the heritage population including subjugating and raping women than the USA and Canada, The USA and Canada are worse than Europe and Australia because of prostitution prohibition. with the exception of a few rural counties in the USA state Nevada which has legal yet way over-priced whores. In order for your way to work better then either lightly regulated legalization or better yet decriminalized prostitution which is safe, clean and affordable needs to be allowed, and immigration needs to be by far more selective and restricted preferably not allowed.
Your sexual utopia of no prostitution and little immigration along with the most sexually aggressive and promiscuous women is the island nation state of Iceland. Most Western women especially in the USA and Canada are rotten for men because they are not Icelandic women. The sexual landscape is a wreck in the USA and Canada primarily because it is American and Canadian women’s fault not men’s.. Watch Youtube videos called Dating Beyond Borders. You should probably move to Iceland.
doclove
Posted at 01:23 pm, 17th March 2026@ Jack Outside the Box
The above anonymous is me, doclove Don’t worry about Caleb Jones. He is Generation X person like me who knows how to take care of himself. You younger ones don’t do as well as us on average at taking care of yourselves. You might be the exception to the rule
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 08:21 pm, 17th March 2026It’s not unjust. They’ve been deceived because they’re betas who pedestal woman. They should use this new knowledge as an excuse to self improve. But if they are addicted to monogamy and they think that polyamory is immoral, then I have no sympathy for them. Let them do what Roosh does – go to the third world and find a blue pilled virgin girl.
There you go.
While we got to discreetly fuck their wives.
Neither. I just don’t want to live under Christianity or Islam or any prudish religion. I prefer sexual liberation for both sexes. That’s just how I’m wired. If that makes me selfish, so be it.
I don’t believe in the so called “black pill.” There’s only blue and red – lies and truth.
This is where the seduction community comes in. We can’t save everyone, but we can try to save a few. As Rollo Tomassi once said (a tradcon who I generally don’t respect), the best we can do is save the betas who want to be saved and give last rites to the dying.
There are also female players who want for their sex lives what alpha males want for theirs. My two baby mommas, who are my friends with benefits, are both in open relationships with their beta boyfriends, and those two betas are okay with me fucking their women, even while I am officially in a monogamous relationship with my girlfriend who I’m cheating on with them.
What people, including men, will accept is far more flexible in this culture than you think. Things can be worked out under a sexual liberation paradigm.
Which is why they need to either change, go to the third world, dig into their blue pill delusions and be none the wiser, or go full MGTOW. I don’t care which one they do.
I’ll take western style sexual liberation over blue pilled Christianity or Islam any day.
Fine. As a libertarian, I don’t mind legalizing prostitution. Let the losers pay for pussy while we get it for free from willing and enthusiastic women.
Prostitution should be recognized as being for betas and losers with no game.
As for immigration, I don’t mind it as long as the immigrants are legal and assimilate to western culture. Most won’t, which is why most immigrants need to be kept out. Only those who are willing to die to their old selves and be born again as proud westerners and Americans should be let in. There are three types of immigrants – assimilationists, temporary sojourners, and invaders. I love the first type and tolerate the second. But the third comprise the majority of immigrants from Latin America today. They wish to colonize us and take over. That is an act of war, which is why they should be treated like any other invading army.
Yes, please!
Or Denmark.
But I’ve found such women here in America and am very happy with my sex life, so there’s no need for me to move anywhere. Sure, it would be better if there were more female players, but they exist even here. You just have to find them. And I have definitely found them. I currently have one “monogamous” girlfriend, plus two friends with benefits, who are also my baby mommas. Yes, I have two children and am working on a third.
Muslim countries make me nervous. Muslim countries that are currently getting bombed more so. I was worried because Dubai is getting bombed and he hasn’t posted in a while, so I just thought I’d ask if everything is alright.
Oh, there is no way I could take care of myself in some foreign country, especially one where its people don’t even speak English. I’m an American right down to my very bones, and I will be an American till the day I die.