|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The next person I hear...
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
...talking about legal marriage as a procreation licence, and therefore of no relevance to same-sex couples, is going to be pushed under a fucking bus.
Because this murderous act on my part will at least increase the average IQ of the population.
I HAVE FUCKING HAD IT. Person after mindless person mindlessly repeating the same fundamentally illogical argument. Dear sweet Jesus Christ, after this many years of discussion how is it possible that none of these people have spent FIVE FUCKING MINUTES ACTUALLY THINKING ABOUT WHETHER CHILDLESS COUPLES CAN GET MARRIED?
I'm not talking about whether it's moral, or Biblical, or whatever the fuck you all want to think in your own personal worldview. I'm talking about having the basic skills to notice that the State doesn't do fertility spot checks. I'm talking about considering whether people over the age of 45 ever get married. I'm talking about just fucking working out how babies are made.
I just can't take it any more. It's one thing to be in disagreement with someone who has thought their position through. But to be opposed by complete and utter morons who appear to be the result of a breeding pair that shouldn't have been permitted is just too much.
Think of the children? WHO THE FUCK SAID ANYTHING ABOUT CHILDREN???
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Amen.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tortuf
Ship's fisherman
# 3784
|
Posted
It is astonishing how hard it is to think up a good reason to disguise being a judgmental prat.
Hence marriage is about procreation. An argument that falls apart immediately after procreation is no longer possible with a heterosexual couple. And that falls apart with heterosexual couples that cannot, or choose not, to have children.
Other than that it is a great theory.
Posts: 6963 | From: The Venice of the South | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
Indeed, as with Mr Marten and me. I was widowed, he divorced, when we married 5 years ago (anniversary yesterday actually ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) ). We were both over 60 so no bloody chance of any more kids even had we wanted them - we have four grownup kids between us anyway.
Silly buggers.
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
jacobsen
seeker
# 14998
|
Posted
Seconded.
--------------------
But God, holding a candle, looks for all who wander, all who search. - Shifra Alon
Beauty fades, dumb is forever-Judge Judy
The man who made time, made plenty.
Posts: 8040 | From: Æbleskiver country | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
So when you have finished having children, you should divorce? So the purpose of a wife is simply to push out child after child?
I am so with you on this orfeo. I haven't actually seen that response, but the use of all sorts of pathetic excuses to oppose people making committed relationship to each other is ridiculous.
I don't have a problem with rational, reasoned argument, even if (especially if) I disagree. But stupidity doesn't help anyone.
I saw a picture of a banner the other day saying something like "Same sex marriage is the line God has drawn". My immediate reaction was to ask how this person knew what lines God has drawn? How they could seem to argue this despite the lines God drawn in the Bible being completely different ones. And ones that have been crossed repeatedly.
I just cannot see how people who claim to consider the Bible as their touchstone, their core source of belief, can be so casual about ACTUALLY READING IT AND KNOWING WHAT IT SAYS.
The thing is, I would actually like to have a discussion somewhere about the biblical teaching on homosexuality. I think there might well be some important and useful messages in that. Not that it says much, so it would be a rather niche discussion, but relevant. And we can't, because it is either "IGNORE IT" or "THIS IS THE MOST CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TEACHING IN THE UNIVERSE".
Really some people, Get a life. And if you are going to speak about about things, get a brain cell.
Oh, and if you are going to tell other people that God hates them, kindly cut off your genitals, shove them in your mouth, and STFU.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
So when you have finished having children, you should divorce? So the purpose of a wife is simply to push out child after child?
Yeah, I was trying to figure out a way to put it without co-opting the complaint, but that would be the implication, wouldn't it? Holy Cow, if we admit that pair- bonding is about something more than sex and procreation, we have to start thinking about women as something other than brood mares and helpmeets, don't we? To the barricades! We can't have that!
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Holy Cow, if we admit that pair- bonding is about something more than sex and procreation, we have to start thinking about women as something other than brood mares and helpmeets, don't we? To the barricades! We can't have that!
Kelly nails it, as is not unusual.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Well, SC, nailed it, I just elaborated. Like the helpmeet I am. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Even the Book of Common Prayer of 1549 recognised there was more to marriage than children and avoiding sin: quote:
... for the mutuall societie, helpe, and coumfort, that the one oughte to have of thother, both in prosperitie and adversitie
.
And I can't recall any cleric ever questioning whether or not a woman was still capable of child-bearing.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Well, SC, nailed it, I just elaborated. Like the helpmeet I am.
And you not even having procreated! Who'd'a thunk it possible?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I am sorry, but I cannot agree with orfeo.
It would simply be unfair to the bus driver, the street cleaners and any passers-by who might be splashed by blood.
I suggest a seaside cliff. Self cleaning and a free meal for the fishes.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Well, SC, nailed it, I just elaborated. Like the helpmeet I am.
And you not even having procreated! Who'd'a thunk it possible?
Shhhh! Not so loud. Someone might revoke her licence to be funny.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif) right, mousethief? I spend my days knee deep in children, but yet somehow I manage to be " barren." Crazy world we live in.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I am sorry, but I cannot agree with orfeo.
It would simply be unfair to the bus driver, the street cleaners and any passers-by who might be splashed by blood.
I suggest a seaside cliff. Self cleaning and a free meal for the fishes.
Shit. I can't believe I was so selfish and was ready to impose my lifestyle choices on others.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
So when you have finished having children, you should divorce? So the purpose of a wife is simply to push out child after child?
Yeah, I was trying to figure out a way to put it without co-opting the complaint, but that would be the implication, wouldn't it? Holy Cow, if we admit that pair- bonding is about something more than sex and procreation, we have to start thinking about women as something other than brood mares and helpmeets, don't we? To the barricades! We can't have that!
Credit where it's due, it was the Ship that made me realise that opposition to same-sex marriage was in fact profoundly anti-feminist. I've now used what I learned here on Facebook, on a story about Australian political reaction to the US ruling (our Constitution doesn't say exciting things like "treat everyone equally" so we have to solve this through Parliament), and the Likes have been accumulating nicely.
I've even been called a champion. *blushes*
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
( standing ovation.)
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wesley J
Silly Shipmate
# 6075
|
Posted
Standing ovulation?
--------------------
Be it as it may: Wesley J will stay. --- Euthanasia, that sounds good. An alpine neutral neighbourhood. Then back to Britain, all dressed in wood. Things were gonna get worse. (John Cooper Clarke)
Posts: 7354 | From: The Isles of Silly | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Who are are the time-warped freaks who still believe hubby and wifey only have sex when they want to make a baby? Shock, horror! men and women really do have sexual activity purely for pleasure. So why, by definition of logic, can't any consenting person over the age of 16, of any persuasion anywhere in the world do the same?
I can't for the life of me see why marriage, an institution that has been crumbling for decades, is such a big deal anymore. OK it's a legal beagle, why then aren't the marriage advocates welcoming all who wish to support it. Order over chaos is surely what the establishment craves isn't it?
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
And anyway, anybody who believes married couples spend the majority of their time having sex has never been married.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Even the Book of Common Prayer of 1549 recognised there was more to marriage than children and avoiding sin: quote:
... for the mutuall societie, helpe, and coumfort, that the one oughte to have of thother, both in prosperitie and adversitie
.
And I can't recall any cleric ever questioning whether or not a woman was still capable of child-bearing.
Ah yes, the Book of Common Prayer, put together by a king who was very concerned about matters like succession.
Lets face it, the institution as outlined in the BCP has more to do with property rights than child bearing.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
I can't for the life of me see why marriage, an institution that has been crumbling for decades, is such a big deal anymore. OK it's a legal beagle, why then aren't the marriage advocates welcoming all who wish to support it. Order over chaos is surely what the establishment craves isn't it?
IMO, marriage is an important part of our society - it is about long-term commitment, it is about two people wanting to declare that they are together forever.
And, of course, marriage has been changing all the time (as anyone who saw the Sex and the Church series will know) and the particular variation that supporters want to retain is a recent version of the idea. It is changing, and always has been, It is not the same static idea that some people claim.
Lets be clear, until relatively recently, marriage was primarily a financial transaction. It is not that same as the biblical concept of marriage. It is something that is - and should - reflect the society we are currently in.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rev per Minute
Shipmate
# 69
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Even the Book of Common Prayer of 1549 recognised there was more to marriage than children and avoiding sin: quote:
... for the mutuall societie, helpe, and coumfort, that the one oughte to have of thother, both in prosperitie and adversitie
.
And I can't recall any cleric ever questioning whether or not a woman was still capable of child-bearing.
Ah yes, the Book of Common Prayer, put together by a king who was very concerned about matters like succession.
I'm sure that Edward VI was concerned about the succession, but as he was about 17 when he died and somewhat poorly I don't think he was really up to it (fnarr fnarr)
I do remember a case in the early 80s when a disabled man, unable to have children, was refused marriage in a Catholic Church in the UK because the marriage could not produce children. I don't know whether that was later overturned by Rome or not - I'm afraid I've not done my research...
When you think of how many marriages have not produced children, of how many elderly couples have been married, never mind death-bed weddings (not much chance to be open to the gift of children), the 'marriage is only for having children' argument doesn't so much fall down as collapse in a heap of dust and blow away like a vampire finding himself suddenly on a beach on the Côte d'Azur in midsummer.
--------------------
"Allons-y!" "Geronimo!" "Oh, for God's sake!" The Day of the Doctor
At the end of the day, we face our Maker alongside Jesus. RIP ken
Posts: 2696 | From: my desk (if I can find the keyboard under this mess) | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
I cannot remember who, but one shipmate has informed me that, despite the nuptial mass with all trimmings, MrP and I are not really married because we had decided that we did not want children.
I kinda admire the consistency but ... ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
I cannot remember who, but one shipmate has informed me that, despite the nuptial mass with all trimmings, MrP and I are not really married because we had decided that we did not want children.
Presumably this is not really married "in the eyes of God".
God, of course, having written a quite separate piece of marriage legislation in a language no-one can quite read anymore, in badly faded ink, with no professional judges to aid in the interpretation and using totally untrained assistant drafters.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
IMO, marriage is an important part of our society - it is about long-term commitment, it is about two people wanting to declare that they are together forever.
And, of course, marriage has been changing all the time (as anyone who saw the Sex and the Church series will know) and the particular variation that supporters want to retain is a recent version of the idea. It is changing, and always has been, It is not the same static idea that some people claim.
Lets be clear, until relatively recently, marriage was primarily a financial transaction. It is not that same as the biblical concept of marriage. It is something that is - and should - reflect the society we are currently in.
To be fair, though, if marriage is changing all the time then there need be no automatic assumption that it always has to be about wanting to stay together forever.
I wouldn't be surprised to discover that in some cultures the notion of permanency in marriage isn't assumed in the wedding ceremony. And anonymous surveys might show that many Western couples get married today sensing that they might not stay together. The normality of divorce and the optional nature of marriage must make the idea of being with one person for 40+ years quite hard for many bridal couples to contemplate.
Anyway, in the spirit of Hell: you lot ought to stop hanging out with reactionary old people! They'll soon be dead! Leave their old morality to die with them and stop whingeing about what they think. Who cares??
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Piglet
Islander
# 11803
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
... MrP and I are not really married because we had decided that we did not want children ...
That puts D. and me in the same boat. I got the most frightful ticking-off from some troll on the Daily Telegraph comments board in a discussion about "childless-by-choice" couples; he/she suggested that we should rectify the situation and do our bit for the continuance of the human race before it was too late. I pointed out that as I'm 53 and he's 59, it already was.
Can't these idiots understand that by not having children, we're also not adding anything to the burden on the health, education or welfare services? Not to mention the months of maternity leave that I haven't had. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Orfeo:
God, of course, having written a quite separate piece of marriage legislation ...
Our marriage ceremony came straight from God - it was from the Book of Common Prayer ... ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
[ 28. June 2015, 01:44: Message edited by: Piglet ]
--------------------
I may not be on an island any more, but I'm still an islander.
alto n a soprano who can read music
Posts: 20272 | From: Fredericton, NB, on a rather larger piece of rock | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
God, of course, having written a quite separate piece of marriage legislation. . . .
Well, there's Genesis 2:24, although mentioning it means you have to deal with Genesis 2:23 also.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
God, of course, having written a quite separate piece of marriage legislation. . . .
Well, there's Genesis 2:24, although mentioning it means you have to deal with Genesis 2:23 also.
Oh my God, you mean there are relevant Bible verses? My goodness, when I was referring to how God's law gets brought into the conversation, I wasn't thinking about the Bible! I was thinking about some other document entirely!
[/sarcasm]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BessLane
Shipmate
# 15176
|
Posted
all ya'll come live in the Bible Belt of the US....rural back country Southern nowhere. From what I've heard, the ruling somehow cheapens or invalidates my (childless by choice) marriage. Nope, not even close.
But at least it's gotten that danged flag, for the most part, out of recent conversation.....
--------------------
It's all on me and I won't tell it.
formerly BessHiggs
Posts: 1388 | From: Yorkville, TN | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Well, good news. I've found someone to push under the metaphorical bus, via a mutual friend on Facebook.
But sadly I'm finding the anger with which I'm burning is quite righteous. I'm even using Biblical words like "hypocrisy".
EDIT: Nothing undermines what Christian belief I have left quite like the fact that so many of my straight brothers and sisters in Christ are colossal hypocritical arseholes.
[ 28. June 2015, 07:01: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
1. Lets be clear, until relatively recently, marriage was primarily a financial transaction.
2. It is something that is - and should - reflect the society we are currently in. [/QB]
1. For whom? Perhaps for a few landholding rich people but seeing as most of the population of the UK owned little or nothing it hardly holds water does it?
2. I agree there are always cultural influences: I went to a wedding service yesterday and there were enough of them there! And yet, it was almost a timeless event: a 16th century church in parkland, a summer day with the sounds of summer coming in through the open door. Is there not real value in following an understanding of a major community event that has been part of the fabric of society? Why must things change? What value does it bring?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
EDIT: Nothing undermines what Christian belief I have left quite like the fact that so many of my straight brothers and sisters in Christ are colossal hypocritical arseholes.
I totally get that. Unfortunately it appears to apply to, well, pretty much everyone at some point or other, just not always as obviously or as offensively.
That said, I keep trying to tell myself that my faith is developing and evolving, not dwindling. I'm not sure I'm doing a great job of convincing myself, and a not insignificant chunk of the issue relates to the disconnect between what we claim to believe, and how we end up behaving (yeah, I know, Paul, Romans, blah).
Even so, if we jacked everything in where someone claims one thing and does another, we'd all be living in isolation and total sensory deprivation.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
1. For whom? Perhaps for a few landholding rich people but seeing as most of the population of the UK owned little or nothing it hardly holds water does it?
Well, in fact for many centuries most people simply never got formally married. They would be what was known as a "common law" husband and wife, and basically started living together. Only the landholders went through the church formalities.
I forget exactly what year it was, but the idea that you had to get officially married to be husband and wife was introduced by legislation. I think it might have been in the 1700s but don't quote me on that.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I'm really not sure why there is a push for marriage by the gay community. Having tried marriage I wish I hadn't. It would be much simpler to be free to enter into relationships without the ties and obligations that marriage entails. And then if you fall out of love, there wouldn't be the expense and headache of a divorce. In fact, I think at this stage of my life there is something to be said for celibacy. It seems odd to me that so many heterosexuals are trying to escape from their marriages whilst so many gays are wanting to walk the bridal path. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Why must things change? What value does it bring?
Ah, a proponent of the idea of certain people as property I see. Society will improve with your departure.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
1. For whom? Perhaps for a few landholding rich people but seeing as most of the population of the UK owned little or nothing it hardly holds water does it?
Well, in fact for many centuries most people simply never got formally married. They would be what was known as a "common law" husband and wife, and basically started living together. Only the landholders went through the church formalities.
I forget exactly what year it was, but the idea that you had to get officially married to be husband and wife was introduced by legislation. I think it might have been in the 1700s but don't quote me on that.
Marriage by habitation and repute lasted until 2006 in Scottish law.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
1. Lets be clear, until relatively recently, marriage was primarily a financial transaction.
2. It is something that is - and should - reflect the society we are currently in.
1. For whom? Perhaps for a few landholding rich people but seeing as most of the population of the UK owned little or nothing it hardly holds water does it?
The society we live in. All of it. Today, it should reflect the society that we have. It used to represent joining of families, in a fundamental way. These days it is more the joining of individuals.
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
2. I agree there are always cultural influences: I went to a wedding service yesterday and there were enough of them there! And yet, it was almost a timeless event: a 16th century church in parkland, a summer day with the sounds of summer coming in through the open door. Is there not real value in following an understanding of a major community event that has been part of the fabric of society? Why must things change? What value does it bring?
It was a "timeless" event because it reflected what you understand as timeless. I suspect that 150 years ago, they wouldn't have recognised it. When the church was built, they would probably have considered it a ridiculous or possibly heretical event.
The historical connection is in a word, very little more. The meaning, the implications, the nature of the event that marks the wedding ceremony is no more timeless than the means of transport to the event is.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
...talking about legal marriage as a procreation licence
Procreation licences. Now there's an idea. I wouldn't mind working in that issuing office.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
16th Century church? You do realise that in Shakespeare's time, many marriages were agreed by handfasting followed by consummation. It was something the Puritanical London city fathers were trying to encourage into the churches along with the enactment of a Deuteronomical law that made sex before marriage punishable by death, but it was against the mores of the times (hence much of the plot of Measure for Measure, written in the early 1600s).
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And anyway, anybody who believes married couples spend the majority of their time having sex has never been married.
This is a very good point, imo.
If the aim of those who oppose gayness in every form is to reduce the amount of actual naughtiness going on, then gay marriage would seem the ideal way to go about it.
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I'm afraid that i do think that heterosexual marriage or quasi-marriage is normatively about procreation (as well as all the other things that make marriage a good thing) in a way that same-sex marriage or quasi marriage is not. Sure, there are straight couples who cannot have children or who (like myself and Mrs A) do not have children, and they are not any the less married for that, and there are gay couples whose relationship provides a firm basis for childrearing. But on the whole I'd say that heterosexual marriage has a presumption of a transgenerational/ procreative element in a way that same sex marriage does not, and so there is a subtle but real difference between them.
So ideally I'd like to have different terms for the two, because I like our vocabulary to be as capable of precise definition as is humanly possible. But there is a practical problem here. I can't think of another term to describe a legally recognised committed and faithful relationship between two people of the same sex that does not leave open some suggestion that such a relationship is in some way necessarily less to be honoured or celebrated or indeed less pleasing in the sight of God than a similar relationship between two people of the opposite sex.
So, believing that a small loss of linguistic precision is a price worth paying to avoid such a suggestion arising, I support marriage, and indeed church marriage, for same sex couples.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Plus, frankly, that precision would only serve to allow for generalisations about supposed differences between the two.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
.... Why must things change? ...
Ah, bless. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Well indeed, arethosemyfeet. And while I do believe that there are differences I also believe that they are much less important than the commonalities. So marriage all round, I say.
[ 28. June 2015, 18:02: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
1. For whom? Perhaps for a few landholding rich people but seeing as most of the population of the UK owned little or nothing it hardly holds water does it?
Well, in fact for many centuries most people simply never got formally married. They would be what was known as a "common law" husband and wife, and basically started living together. Only the landholders went through the church formalities.
I forget exactly what year it was, but the idea that you had to get officially married to be husband and wife was introduced by legislation. I think it might have been in the 1700s but don't quote me on that.
It has become common again to be common law. Most young people in my children's generation who get educated into their late 20s and early 30s do what we used to call "shacking up". After one year, legally common law, and treated by gov't as equivalent to married. Eventually the CRA (Canada Revenue Agency, the income tax people) sends them a questionnaire and declaration about it.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Two opposite-sex nonagenarians marry. We've managed to call that marriage, without pretending to believe that they might be going to have children. Two opposite-sex people with tubes tied and snipped marry. We've managed to call that marriage, without inquiring into the state of the reproductive organs of the couple to see if they're procreatively married or some different kind of married.
But a same-sex couple marries, and that's a different kind of marriage because of how or whether they will have children?
That makes no sense to me.
[ 28. June 2015, 18:22: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
What? You expect the omnipotent God to do miracles?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
