|
Polygamy coming to Canada (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| 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. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by dEsidEL
Shadowolf is fighting against ur right to have a harem
|
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:
Muslims deserve more than one wife because we work so hard. |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
was it written by a liberal :D:D:D:D |
lol, I don't know...if so, it *must* be biased, commie-loving, left-wing propaganda, right? :D
it's quite a good read...I'd love for some sort of course on logic and argumentation theory to be taught at the high school level (is it now?), even just as an elective.
I think *anyone* who has to write papers at a post-secondary level, even simple opinion pieces, etc. would immensely benefit from a course on logic and reasoning.
Trudy Govier's "A Practical Study of Argument" is another good one for anyone who may be interested...she teaches/taught at the U. of Calgary...damnit, I think she's a dirty liberal or socialist too. oh well. :D |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by nacarter
... |
great post with interesting points.
it's funny that in gays seeking the right to marry, it's somehow been twisted into a gays. vs. the Church issue in some people's minds...when, as you point out, the Church hardly has exclusive domain over marriage, particularly in a multi-cultural society such as ours and in relation to the global village. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| 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? |
I'm pretty sure that the answer to "where" would be "here, in North America", and the answer to "when" would be "after becoming independent nations". Any other definition seems irrelevant.
Believe it or not, tradition is not religion, and I find it rather ignorant to be painting anyone who opposes gay marriage as some religious zealot and opponent of progress. To me it's a moot point - I've stated my position several times on here that the state should just get out of the business of marriage altogether and just perform civil unions - for everyone. Still, maybe people who talk about "tradition" are just talking about the tried-and-true systems that were in place during the industrial revolution, when society made the most actual progress?
Something to think about perhaps. |
|
|
| Shamen DJ's |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Once you destroy the traditional family, you open the door to all sorts of perversions.
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=236336
:nervous: :nervous: :nervous:
Polygamy, of course, is being used to court the Muslim vote in Toronto.
LIEBERALS OUT NOW!! :whip: :whip: |
Is there any limit to how ing ignorant you can be. Personally I think you are gay, and your rambling bigotry is nothing but a cover for your latent homosexuality. You probably would rather not see happily married same sex couples because you feel threatened personally by it because you are insecure with your own sexuality. If that was not the case, then why the would you care.
May'be you should go watch the movie Brokeback Mountain, but then again you are so closed minded you probably wouldn't go anyway. I really can't see how my same sex marriage affects anyone in society other than ourselves. We've lasted longer than most "straight" couples and have never committed infidelity. The biggest threat to "family values" is the fact that 50% of heterosexual marriages END IN DIVORCE. And I will bet you that NONE OF THOSE DIVORCES WERE CAUSED BY GAYS.
Since you are preaching "family values" ( which has really become a polite code word for I am a bigot - I hate gays ) then tell us - do you practice what you preach?
1) Have you had premarital sex
2) Are you married
3) Have you ever has sex without the purpose of creation
My guess is that you are just another hippocrat who is using a website about music to spread your bigoted and neo fasciast views, and loves to tell everyone else how they should live their lives. Go yourself & die. |
|
|
| Shamen DJ's |
| There is NO RELATION BETWEEN SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND POLYGAMY. POLYGAMY DISRESPECTS WOMEN and that is why I am against it! Seriously, if you really love someone, you wouldn't cheat on them, so I do not consider Polygamy a valid relationship. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shamen DJ's
There is NO RELATION BETWEEN SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND POLYGAMY. POLYGAMY DISRESPECTS WOMEN and that is why I am against it! Seriously, if you really love someone, you wouldn't cheat on them, so I do not consider Polygamy a valid relationship. |
So you can't love more then one person????
Besides....many people believe that love and sex are completely independent of each other.....I don't....but I know many that do. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| I don't think the argument that polygamy disrespects women is any more valid than the argument that porn disrespects women. If a woman wants to marry a man who already has one wife, then obviously she doesn't have a problem with it or find it disrespectful. |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I don't think the argument that polygamy disrespects women is any more valid than the argument that porn disrespects women. If a woman wants to marry a man who already has one wife, then obviously she doesn't have a problem with it or find it disrespectful. |
or doesn't know :eek:
that dirty man :D
|
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shamen DJ's
There is NO RELATION BETWEEN SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND POLYGAMY. POLYGAMY DISRESPECTS WOMEN and that is why I am against it! Seriously, if you really love someone, you wouldn't cheat on them, so I do not consider Polygamy a valid relationship. |
There is almost no substantitive link between the practices themselves. There is, however, an institutional/procedural link: getting rid of the traditional definition of marriage is a prerequisite to both.
When the Lieberals brought in Bill C-38 (which eliminated traditional marriage), the obvious intent was to bring in gay "marriage." However, now that the definition of marriage has been altered based on a "rights" argument, other practices will have to also be legalized (such as polygamy). Polygamist groups will bring a Charter challenge, and would likely win. |
|
|
|
|
