The sacred institution of marriage... - Page 5 - 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 06-11-2006, 08:33 PM   #61
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Maoilbheannacht


currently do not fall under what many consider to be a traditional form of marriage,
I could honestly care less about what most consider traditional form.

There is no logic to deny incestual marriages, except for reproduction issues which you've already mentioned. For the most part it's just an ick factor. The reason I stressed consenting is that most existing incestual relationships are not 100% consentual.


Quote:
Originally posted by Maoilbheannacht

Everyone agrees that you need to have consenting adults for it to be considered a marriage. This means you could have 5 different groups of people, of which only one would fit under what is regarded as the traditional form of marriage. Each of the 5 could be in a polygamous form as well.
No, polygamy does not fall into this category for it's impossible to have 100% consent. If anyone's watched Big Love on HBO it really does a great job showing the circumstances that aren't consentual within a polygamous relationship. It portrays the family very well, it shows how they try to make everything as fair as possible, but it's never truly consentual.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 08:41 PM   #62
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,400
Local Time: 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I could honestly care less about what most consider traditional form.

There is no logic to deny incestual marriages, except for reproduction issues which you've already mentioned. For the most part it's just an ick factor. The reason I stressed consenting is that most existing incestual relationships are not 100% consentual.




No, polygamy does not fall into this category for it's impossible to have 100% consent. If anyone's watched Big Love on HBO it really does a great job showing the circumstances that aren't consentual within a polygamous relationship. It portrays the family very well, it shows how they try to make everything as fair as possible, but it's never truly consentual.
Well, you could say that there are marriages between adult Hetero people that are not fully consentual either. If your an adult and you consent to enter into a relationship that is a polygamous one, you always have the option to leave the relationship if you change your mind. Were talking about polygamy in the general sense, simply a marriage between 3 or more people, not the controlled families that you find in Utah.
__________________

__________________
Maoilbheannacht is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 08:51 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 12:20 PM
Why don't we just outlaw marriage for everyone then?

If we use your line of logic, any kind of marriage then takes us on the path of "who else will want to join in" so I say ban it alltogether.

I'm kind of sick of married people benefitting from the tax man and getting pots and pans for their wedding. Nobody bought me linen and a toaster when I decided to stay single.

Down with marriage!
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 08:54 PM   #64
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Maoilbheannacht


Well, you could say that there are marriages between adult Hetero people that are not fully consentual either.
Yes, but like you're incest analogies there are also couples who are not related and will still reproduce with birth defects. Like those that are predispositioned to birth defects polygamy is predispositioned towards submission.

Quote:
Originally posted by Maoilbheannacht

Were talking about polygamy in the general sense, simply a marriage between 3 or more people,
Consent implies equality not just agreement. There is no equality in a relationship where the woman is completely, by nature, submissive to the man's whim. Let's say all three wives want the same thing at the same time but he can only give to one, he chooses which one therefore it's always by his choice.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 08:56 PM   #65
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And that's about the dumbest "reasoning" I've ever heard.
No, it's 100% the truth. Whether YOU consider it dumb really matters not one whit. Fact is, it's true, joe schmo is NOT motivated to go get the law changed. That does NOT make everyone who doesn't go get the law changed a bigot in my eyes, maybe it does in yours. Whatever.

Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Would this have been an accptable answer to tell a black person why they can't sit in the front of the bus?

No, but only because they are, get this, ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ISSUES !


Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I could have guessed this...

LOL! (at, not with)


Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


It shouldn't be a campaign issue. It should be legalized and then we can move on with real issues.
hey Einstein, how do laws get changed ? Here's a clue, if the bulk of voters cared enough to WANT it changed, you can be sure the politicians who have the power to get it changed would try a little harder to do so.

It would appear that for most, the "real issues" come first, what a concept....
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 08:58 PM   #66
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
I'm kind of sick of married people benefitting from the tax man and getting pots and pans for their wedding. Nobody bought me linen and a toaster when I decided to stay single.

But you knew about the pots and pans and "married filing jointly" when you decided to stay single, right ?
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 09:07 PM   #67
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by toscano


No, but only because they are, get this, ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ISSUES !
Really? Entirely different? One was denied privelages due to skin color, and one is denied privelages due to sexuality. Yeah you're right it sounds completely different.



Quote:
Originally posted by toscano

LOL! (at, not with)
Well it was obvious. It's easy to be aloof when you've never been discriminated against by law.




Quote:
Originally posted by toscano

hey Einstein, how do laws get changed ? Here's a clue, if the bulk of voters cared enough to WANT it changed, you can be sure the politicians who have the power to get it changed would try a little harder to do so.

It would appear that for most, the "real issues" come first, what a concept....
What's you're problem? I just said "it shouldn't be" as in, if this were a perfect world we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

You are familiar with that type of thinking aren't you?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 09:23 PM   #68
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Really? Entirely different? One was denied privelages due to skin color, and one is denied privelages due to sexuality. Yeah you're right it's completely different.
The fact that entire movements incorporating citizens of all walks of life sprung up and fought to get one issue changed makes it an entirely different issue. One, the populus at large cared about, the other, not. i.e, Different. I'm not saying it's right, just saying it is.






Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Well it was obvious. It's easy to be aloof when you've never been discriminated against by law.

It's not amatter of aloofness to discrimination, not that you have any idea what discrimination I have or have not been subject to, it's amatter of indifferent due to priorities in life. Legalize, don't legalize it; Either way, spend the energy to fix Iraq, Afghanistan, Healthcare, the Economy, Social Security and balance the Budget first

Can I roll eyes now too ?
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 09:30 PM   #69
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


Why is it that in every single gay marriage thread someone has to bring up incest and polygamy as being a result of legalizing gay marriage and then go on to assure us that they aren't really against gay marriage, they're "just asking?"

What a load of crap disgiused as "thought."

Write the law describing gay marriage just like the law describing straight marriage is written.


There hasn't been any logical reason in this thread or any other to deny homosexuals the right to marry. NOT ONE REASON.
Hey, I brought up polygamy and I support both gay marriage and polygamy, I support gay polygamy too.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 09:40 PM   #70
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by toscano


The fact that entire movements incorporating citizens of all walks of life sprung up and fought to get one issue changed makes it an entirely different issue. One, the populus at large cared about, the other, not. i.e, Different. I'm not saying it's right, just saying it is.
Yes and how long was the populus and conservative politicians on the wrong side of history? So yeah the "entirely different" thing keeps losing it's meaning doesn't it?






Quote:
Originally posted by toscano

It's not amatter of aloofness to discrimination, not that you have any idea what discrimination I have or have not been subject to, it's amatter of indifferent due to priorities in life.
No I have no idea what discrimination you're dealt with, but that's not what I said. I said discrimination by law.

And yes it is a matter of aloofness. Equality IS a priority.


Quote:
Originally posted by toscano

Legalize, don't legalize it; Either way, spend the energy to fix Iraq, Afghanistan, Healthcare, the Economy, Social Security and balance the Budget first
Yeah I'm sure the energy spent to change the law will really take time out of all these things. It's the time debating which is rediculous.

And the Republicans need an issue like this so that people are distracted away from the fact that they can't fix any of these things.

Quote:
Originally posted by toscano

Can I roll eyes now too ?
When I give you something roll worthy, roll away.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 09:47 PM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by toscano


But you knew about the pots and pans and "married filing jointly" when you decided to stay single, right ?
So?

Rosa Parks knew she wasn't allowed at the front of the bus when she decided to sit there, right?

*Not equating the two, but pointing out that times and laws change and evolve. Too bad half the country is regressing socially into some kind of medieval bigotry.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 10:07 PM   #72
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


So?

So you looked at the rules, decided to stay single, but you want to take everyone else's rights to linens and tax benefits away because YOU'RE not participating ? What WOULD Pottery Barn do ?


Quote:
Originally posted by anitram

Too bad half the country is regressing socially into some kind of medieval bigotry.
Actually, since gay marriage was illegal before and is still illegal, how is that a regression ?

And everyone who's not out there campaigning for legalization of gay marriage is a "medieval bigot" ?
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 10:13 PM   #73
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:20 PM
I love Canada. Gay marriage is legal, and the sky hasn't fallen. And, yes, incest, bestiality, and polygamy are all illegal.

It's really funny how Americans expend so much energy trying to be afraid of something.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-11-2006, 10:17 PM   #74
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by toscano


So you looked at the rules, decided to stay single, but you want to take everyone else's rights to linens and tax benefits away because YOU'RE not participating ? What WOULD Pottery Barn do ?
Jesus, Joseph and Mary you took my post seriously.


Quote:
And everyone who's not out there campaigning for legalization of gay marriage is a "medieval bigot" ?
Where did anyone say you need to campaign for it?

If you are against full rights for the citizens of your nation who happen to be gay, yes I consider that to be bigotry. Nobody is equal until everybody is equal.

This is a losing issue for people against it. Modernity and time are working against you and in 50 or a hundred years, kids will be wondering who these bigots are who wanted to restrict rights to a good proportion of the population. This is a generational issue, and with every new generation, the numbers of those against it will decrease steadily. The right can screech hysterically about it now, but they are on the wrong side of this issue longterm.

Just like people were wrong about interracial marriage, just like they were wrong about women not having the right to vote, just like they were wrong about blacks going to separate schools.

Time is on the side of equality, it is only too bad that we can't extend equality to everyone now. As a straight woman, I feel badly that I am more equal than some members of this forum. It's actually embarrassing.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 06-11-2006, 10:20 PM   #75
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Yes and how long was the populus and conservative politicians on the wrong side of history? So yeah the "entirely different" thing keeps losing it's meaning doesn't it?

Second question , no.
First question, nice interjection of 'conservative politicians' (can't have an FYM thread without them in it), as for the general populus, who's counting ? and the number depends on which side of a given particular fence you'd be on.

Disingenious at best, not even a 'nice try'.









Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

No I have no idea what discrimination you're dealt with, but that's not what I said. I said discrimination by law.



Same answer. You still don't know.


Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And yes it is a matter of aloofness. Equality IS a priority.
Clearly legalization of gay marriage is NOT a priority for most. Bush wouldn't be in power if it was.



Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And the Republicans need an issue like this so that people are distracted away from the fact that they can't fix any of these things.


A-ha, you are starting to learn young Grasshoppa.......but you still have much to learn........because you, like the inept Democratic party, will allow the Republicans to build the stage and set the rules, even when you apparently recognize what they are doing.

Want to enact gay marriage legislation ? Take power. How to take it ? Show the voting populus you care about what they care about the most and that you can help them. My whole point here has been that the voters don't want a debate on gay marriage, they want to know how you can help them. If you gain their trust, you gain control of government. If you gain control of government you can then pass other legislation

Play the Reps game and you will lose. Again.

Only the Dems could be so inept as to lose an election to an idiot incumbent fighting an unpopular war in a down economy.
__________________

__________________
toscano 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 12:20 PM.


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