quote:

Originally posted by Jem_hadar Ill tell you whut this fucking world needs, less bible thumpers and over-zealous preachers of god’s supposed will, and a hell of alot more sensible people (and atheists!) [/rant]

+1

___________________
"Let the Music Take Control" - Platipus

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/...arriage.ruling/ Less than two years later, the beastiality bill was proposed. The same process is happening in Canada.

A human being cannot have a consentual sexual relationship with an animal,therefore making beastiality rape, so
it should remain illegal. Bestiality has absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage. Anyone that can't have a relationship with a mature consenting adult ( human ) needs serious professional help. I'm offended that anyone, liberal or conservative would make any connection between the two.

quote:

Originally posted by nacarter I always love the phrase 'Traditional Marriage'. It tends to demonstrate a level of ignorance that most people have about the institution of marriage, especially from a global perspective. Most marriage historians - liberal and conservative alike - tend to respond with 'where' and 'when'. For instance, In the Middle East and in many African cultures, polygamy is 'traditional marriage', especially for the wealthy. In the Hebrew Testament era, polygamy and concubinage were also considered the norm - Solomon had 300 wives and double the number of concubines (See Kings). If polygamy is so offensive in the eyes of God, why was Soloman such a respected biblical citizen? Ironically, the Catholic Church gave same-sex relationships its blessing in the early part of its history. While it can't be claimed that this was a marriage ceremony, the Church recognized the spiritual nature of the relatioship. The Catholic Church also had no official liturgy for marriage until the 12th Century. For a social institution that is supposedly universal and sacred in the eyes of God, it sure took the Church a long time to recognize it. Medieval Chinese society recognized same-sex relationships. In a ceremony remarkably similar to the Catholics, the bond between male lovers was sanctioned on a spiritual and social level. Finally, Native American societies also celebrated same-sex relationships with a twist - one of the male partners underwent a ritual in which he became the female partner. This ritual and the circumstances that surround it are the roots of the GLBT term 'two-spirited'. Even in our own culture, marriage has changed significantly. This institution has shifted dramatically from a patriarchal economic relationship where the main goal of the marriage was to consolidate property and wealth between families and ensure the economic stability of women to an egalitarian relationship where the psychological and emotional needs of the partners are more important. Of note on what today's social conservatives consider traditional marriage is that in the Victorian era where marriage was supposedly the most moral, the social norm was for both men and women to have the spouse for social mobility and economic stability, while still pursuing outside love interests - this occurred widely and was generally accepted. The bottom line of this mini-essay is that 'traditional marriage' is an elusive concept that certainly hasn't stopped the past evolution of this social institution, nor should it be the basis of preventing future evolution.

Very interesting. Polygamy is also considered traditional marriage by many in modern day Utah, unfortunately there is a terrible history of child abuse within those sects. Unfortunately the "family values" coalitions have largely ignored that. Many male youth have even been kicked out of those sects and end up living on the street when they
become old enough to compete for the women in the more extremist mormon sects. There are groups specifically dedicated to helping those youth.

quote:

Originally posted by nacarter I always love the phrase 'Traditional Marriage'. It tends to demonstrate a level of ignorance that most people have about the institution of marriage, especially from a global perspective. Most marriage historians - liberal and conservative alike - tend to respond with 'where' and 'when'. For instance, In the Middle East and in many African cultures, polygamy is 'traditional marriage', especially for the wealthy. In the Hebrew Testament era, polygamy and concubinage were also considered the norm - Solomon had 300 wives and double the number of concubines (See Kings). If polygamy is so offensive in the eyes of God, why was Soloman such a respected biblical citizen? Ironically, the Catholic Church gave same-sex relationships its blessing in the early part of its history. While it can't be claimed that this was a marriage ceremony, the Church recognized the spiritual nature of the relatioship. The Catholic Church also had no official liturgy for marriage until the 12th Century. For a social institution that is supposedly universal and sacred in the eyes of God, it sure took the Church a long time to recognize it. Medieval Chinese society recognized same-sex relationships. In a ceremony remarkably similar to the Catholics, the bond between male lovers was sanctioned on a spiritual and social level. Finally, Native American societies also celebrated same-sex relationships with a twist - one of the male partners underwent a ritual in which he became the female partner. This ritual and the circumstances that surround it are the roots of the GLBT term 'two-spirited'. Even in our own culture, marriage has changed significantly. This institution has shifted dramatically from a patriarchal economic relationship where the main goal of the marriage was to consolidate property and wealth between families and ensure the economic stability of women to an egalitarian relationship where the psychological and emotional needs of the partners are more important. Of note on what today's social conservatives consider traditional marriage is that in the Victorian era where marriage was supposedly the most moral, the social norm was for both men and women to have the spouse for social mobility and economic stability, while still pursuing outside love interests - this occurred widely and was generally accepted. The bottom line of this mini-essay is that 'traditional marriage' is an elusive concept that certainly hasn't stopped the past evolution of this social institution, nor should it be the basis of preventing future evolution.

I will truly feel sorry for the children born of a polygamous relationship.
This Western society can't even handle all the problems with the children of a monogamous one; why complicate it in the name of liberal 'progression' (seems more like an oxymoron in this case).
I wonder if these same people fighting for polygamy will be the same ones that conveniently ignore the problems they are about to unleash. I'm not going to hold my breath because I'm pretty sure I know what that answer is going to be...

There needs to be serious, nation-wide open debate about this and not something a non-elected court pushes down our throats because of one individual case; this effects us ALL...

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."