Tell me about MARRIAGE...... - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-27-2005, 02:51 PM   #16
The Fly
 
Sheltie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: somewhere in time
Posts: 237
Local Time: 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sallycinnamon78
a life sentence.
__________________

__________________
Sheltie is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 02:59 PM   #17
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977
No can do companero.

Marriage is -- whatever else it may be -- ultimately a symbol of the love relationship between God and his people. The part that each person plays in the relationship has been vested with unique meaning. "Male and female, He created them...and it was good." Husbands are called to lay down their lives for their wives (as God loved the church); wives to love their husbands with all that they have (as the church loves God).

IMHO, you can't divorce the subject of marriage from the symbolism it was vested with in the beginning by its Creator...
Quote:
Right now:

The legal union of 2 people not of the same sex
I love how the two of you couldn't step out of the very narrow interpretation of what you think it shouldn't be and focus on what it really is given the parameters of the discussion.

I wonder if this question was asked to you before Bush made this into a conservative Christian against everyone else debate how you would have answered...
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:07 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 07:07 AM
I like how you took an honest opinion and turned it into a political polemic.

A question was asked about a definition in a context that I don't think it can be divorced from, and I said so. Why is that wrong?

And I never said what "it shouldn't be." I said what I see it as -- man and woman. Sorry if that's offensive.
__________________
nathan1977 is online now  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:15 PM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:07 AM
So do not flipping respond.....I am not looking to start yet another debate in FYM about marriage. There is more to marriage than the issue of is it between a man and a woman or a man and man or whatever.

Seriously, no one forces anyone to respond to a thread. Why would you respond if you cannot follow a simple request?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:27 PM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:07 AM
[Q]Ye e e e sss....> Oh Christ....aahhh, but, Will, she's been
dead two years and that's the shit I remember.
Wonderful stuff, you know, little things like that. Ah,
but, those are the things I miss the most. The little
idiosyncrasies that only I knew about. That's what made
her my wife. Oh and she had the goods on me, too, she
knew all my little peccadillos. < People call these things
imperfections, but they're not, aw that's the good stuff. >
And then we get to choose who we let in to our weird
little worlds. [/Q]

After 16 years of dating and marriage......this is one quote that sums up how I feel about marriage.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:29 PM   #21
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 711
Local Time: 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar




I love how the two of you couldn't step out of the very narrow interpretation of what you think it shouldn't be and focus on what it really is given the parameters of the discussion.

I wonder if this question was asked to you before Bush made this into a conservative Christian against everyone else debate how you would have answered...
Personally, I answered what it is currently, without editorializing or taking any kind political stance on it, or saying what I think it ought or ought not to be.
__________________
cardosino is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:32 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino


Personally, I answered what it is currently, without editorializing or taking any kind political stance on it, or saying what I think it ought or ought not to be.
Personally, I think you are trolling. You certainly did not respond in the spirit of my question and secondly, here in Massachusetts, your "definition" is wrong.

Again though, if that is how shallow an interpretation of marriage people have I cannot do anything about it. All I can ask is that you keep the debate over marriage out of this thread, repectfully, and focus on other more important parts of marriage. And if you can't do not respond.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 03:56 PM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 03:07 PM
This is actually a difficult question to answer. In some cultures, marriages can involve more than one spouse. For others, a marriage may not be exclusive ie an open marriage.

Marriage is a commitment of an amount of people who may or may not choose to be sexually and/ or emotionally exclusive.

ummm, hmmmmm

marriage = love
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:01 PM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 03:07 PM
..... except when it doesn't eg marriages for political reasons etc
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:03 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:07 AM
"Love at first sight is easy to understand; it's when two people have been looking at each other for a lifetime that it becomes a miracle."
(Sam Levenson)
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:04 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:07 AM
"Marriage -- as its veterans know well -- is the continuous process of getting used to things you hadn't expected."
(Tom Mullen)
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:08 PM   #27
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 711
Local Time: 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Personally, I think you are trolling.

Your opinion is noted.

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

You certainly did not respond in the spirit of my question and secondly, here in Massachusetts, your "definition" is wrong.
If I was in Massachusetts that might have influenced my answer.

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

Again though, if that is how shallow an interpretation of marriage people have I cannot do anything about it.
That is the definition as was explained to me by a friend in the legal industry (not in Massachusetts), I just changed part of the wording to meet the response parameter you set.


Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

All I can ask is that you keep the debate over marriage out of this thread, repectfully, and focus on other more important parts of marriage. And if you can't do not respond.
You asked for a description, you got one. I'm sorry you don't like the one I gave, but when you start a thread, you will not always get answers you like. Often they will veer way off course. As this has apparently done.

Cheers
__________________
cardosino is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:11 PM   #28
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 711
Local Time: 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar




I love how the two of you couldn't step out of the very narrow interpretation of what you think it shouldn't be and focus on what it really is given the parameters of the discussion.

I wonder if this question was asked to you before Bush made this into a conservative Christian against everyone else debate how you would have answered...
Oh, and I would have given you the same answer, as the definition here in California has not changed Pre or Post Bush.

I voted for Kerry by the way.




__________________
cardosino is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:18 PM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:07 AM
Prior to the 19th century, "marriage" was a business merger. A man would marry a woman and enjoy the "dowry" he could get along with it. Hence, mistresses were quite common, because you'd be married to the woman for the property/business reasons and in love with your mistress.

The idea of marriage being about "love" was instituted by leftist Protestants in the 19th century. I guess it worked for most of the Western world, because I don't see many people getting married for the dowry (there are always "golddiggers" though; watch reality TV!).

Nowadays? It's quite simple: people marry for all sorts of reasons, and no one ever asks. Ideally? It would be for love and love alone. If religion is in the way, though, it's because a lot of their theology was written in the pre-19th century mindset. "Love" was, frankly, irrelevant.

The disconnect between the past and present may be why we're in such a conflict over what "marriage" is anymore.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 04:19 PM   #30
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 01:07 AM
Quote:
Mawidge...mawidge is what bwings us togewer today...
- Princess Bride
__________________

__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com