If I make a statement of fact, it's on me to support it scripturally.
I'm not saying I disagree with you. I asked if this view could be supported by scripture. I generally agree with you in principle.
However, some women can't find husbands and maybe their father isn't alive anymore.
These are actually the "undesired" women I was referring to in my widows, orphans and reproach question in Pete's online outreach video thread. Where I ask if women are unable to find a husband, even though they are wanting, are they still in reproach? As their situation is not of their own choosing, how can they be held at fault and what kind of picture does that paint? I used beauty as the example in that question, because it is somewhat rare for a generally attractive woman to be unable to find a man to wife her. Most men I've known place beauty at the top of their list, if given the choice. So her beauty gives her economic leverage in man selection that less beautiful women may not have. His access to resources being the deciding factor on who from his pool he chooses. Beauty being subjective to him, but still playing a large role in the decision. If a man is required to provide resources for any woman he takes as a wife, not having unlimited resources means that every wife taken must be considered wisely. If his active pool is 10 but his resources limit him to 1, the most beautiful to him is most likely going to be the one he will choose, leaving 9 women husbandless. Not because he doesn't want any of the others, but because he lacks the resources to take any more on, even though all 10 were interested in him.
This doesn't mean he is holding out for the most beautiful women, but instead chosing the best options for him from his avaiable supply according to the limited resources at his disposal. Simple economics of supply and demand. Considering a life long commitment is a big undertaking, any man who seeks to fulfill this duty, is going to pick the women most worth the investment of his limited resources, with most men unable to entertain all their options, what becomes of the remainder?
This is one of the reasons why I want to define reproach, if we apply a blanket statement to all unmarried women, even when it is no fault of their own, is that placing these women under unfair shame? or if unable to find a husband in a timely matter should she be like the Isaiah 4:1 women and waive her rights just to be covered? Which is more important? The circumstances surrounding scarcity of men being different for the women in Isaiah 4:1 in compaison to the scenario for today's women. The problem is the same, are all women who cannot find a husband, whether out of scarcity of men, limited resources, and ignorance or refusal of biblical marriage in reproach? If not where is the line drawn?
Is Isaiah 4:1 making a general blanket statement for all unwed women? Scarcity having these women so desperate for a husband of any kind that they are willing to waive his requirements, because they all are the women who can't find a husband at this point, regardless of the reason. With most of todays men lacking the resources for even one wife, how much so the remaining men of Isaiah 4:1 to take on 7? Those women left with the only options of waiving their requirements or going husbandless.
On a side note what level of desperation is required to break the modern feminist monogamy only mindset of a woman? It's kind of a scary thought considering how entrenched that mindset is...