Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 23:13:46 GMT -5
Well then Rational, we are well under way on a grand experiment. No restraint, no inhibition, no idea of where to draw the line, or whether there should even BE a line.
When morals began to loosen up after WWII people were saying this would never happen. Not only are we in a social experiment, but our experimenters don't have a clue.
And in Australia now some schools have to teach primary school boys that girls aren't sexual objects, contrary to what our culture teaches them. Who says the teachers are right? It's all opinion?
We had religion in schools when I was there - and the school was divided into Catholics and Protestants. We are thankful that doesn't happen now - not because we are "tolerant" but because we don't care. And back then it was well understood by all boys that if you thought girls were sex objects, or you said anything rude, that not only would you get a hiding from the teacher, your father would give you one too.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jun 26, 2015 0:55:13 GMT -5
Quote - "There is a difference between charging someone for drinking alcohol and charging someone for child porn. I'm not sure why that is so hard for you to understand. As far as people changing over the centuries, thankfully they have. It was once okay to own other human beings. It was once okay to have child labor. Just to name a couple of things we have changed our minds about. Changing our minds about things once we have new data, isn't a bad thing. It is a sign that we were wrong in the first place and the change was needed. It would be worse to learn new data and still not change our ways of thinking about it. That would be more criminal imo." Time article ca 2010 spoke of the way American conservatives felt about homosexual marriage. The article said to the effect that conservatives felt about "gay marriage" in the same way liberals felt about polygamy. But guess what - polygamy COULD be the next "last taboo" issue for American society.Bert, I can never see Polygamy catching on. The thought of two or more mother in laws would put any sensible bloke off.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2015 1:09:15 GMT -5
And when homosexuals win that right next week how will the rest of us every know if it is polygyny, polyandry, or polyamory! Marriage was once a set-in-stone, organic foundation to society. When marriage becomes a political issue then why can't a man have a weekend-only marriage to two women or three boys? Will homosexuals(or their supporters) deny everyone else their conjugal rights? Bert, I am beginning to wonder if perhaps you might be a "set-in-stone" neanderthal ?
Now, now, -not to worry if your are because this new series called "First Peoples" on PBS indicates that we can now use DNA to trace our ancestry back to a time when early man & neanderthals inter-mated.
So you see it isn't anything personally against you!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 5:40:36 GMT -5
Quote - "...set-in-stone" neanderthal"
Typical conversation over my lifetime goes something like this.
Bert - you watch, these gays will demand marriage one day Activist - you are just being extreme! All they want is decriminalization!
Later....
Bert - see what I said... gay marriage! Activist - what are you talking about? Gay marriage should be legalized. Bert - told you so. Activist - what are you implying? I don't remember being against gay marriage!
I got it wrong (so far) with South Africa and Mandela. I predicted that country would go the way of Zimbabwe after apartheid (at that time the SA Communist Party was pretty strong.) But on social trends I tracked - I got it right. Not bad for a Neanderthal.
ps do Workers believe in Neanderthals?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 26, 2015 7:07:15 GMT -5
Well then Rational, we are well under way on a grand experiment. No restraint, no inhibition, no idea of where to draw the line, or whether there should even BE a line. Humans have always had the ability for self regulation. What they didn't need was a paranormal entity in the sky with others telling them how that entity wanted them to behave. Morals did not loosen up. Behavior changed. If you believe morals changed perhaps an example would be in order. After WWII, almost any activity would have been more moral by comparison. The teachers are wrong. As a species the female is a sexual object. As is the male. Did you ever consider the fact that perhaps it is another force that has been causing problems with how women are treated? The bible, for example, really does not set a great example and that is the guide for about 1/ 3 of the people on earth. No, we don't care about religion. It does not set a great example. People need to have their own moral code and not simply follow 'orders'. [/b][/quote]Yes. And it has been shown so many times that punishment is such a great way to teach any one/thing anything. "Don't throw stones at Billy or your teacher and your father will give you a hiding." And the girls were/are still treated as sex objects and stones were still thrown at Billy. Just not in front of the teacher or your father. bert, the 'good old days' weren't good.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 10:43:42 GMT -5
Okay, I'm probably just going to 'rest your case' with this comment but here goes. Is there a reason why polygamy is an issue? If all the adults are consenting, why is polygamy illegal? It should be both ways though, not just many wives, but many husbands too if that's the way it works for them. In a home with more two spouses, the children have more caregivers and possibly more bread winners too. It's not for everyone, but it does seem to work for some. Why are we against it if it works? It's not like it isn't biblical, the Hebrews did it. Shhhh, Snow! Not yet! Wait until after the Supreme Court of the U.S. rules in favor of same-sex marriage tomorrow. Then we can start advocating for polygamy next week! Well, I'm glad we got that settled: www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/26/417717613/supreme-court-rules-all-states-must-allow-same-sex-marriages
Now, Snow, where did we leave off on that discussion about the right to polygamy?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 26, 2015 15:52:35 GMT -5
Okay, I'm probably just going to 'rest your case' with this comment but here goes. Is there a reason why polygamy is an issue? If all the adults are consenting, why is polygamy illegal? It should be both ways though, not just many wives, but many husbands too if that's the way it works for them. In a home with more two spouses, the children have more caregivers and possibly more bread winners too. It's not for everyone, but it does seem to work for some. Why are we against it if it works? It's not like it isn't biblical, the Hebrews did it. Shhhh, Snow! Not yet! Wait until after the Supreme Court of the U.S. rules in favor of same-sex marriage tomorrow. Then we can start advocating for polygamy next week! LOL well I heard today that the Supreme Court of the US rules in favor of same-sex Marriage! That is awesome. I laughed though when I heard people were going to move to Canada because of the ruling. I imagine they will have to turn around and head somewhere else once they figure out we've had same sex marriage in Canada for some time now, and, it's legal!
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 26, 2015 15:57:53 GMT -5
ps do Workers believe in Neanderthals? Do you think Neanderthals care if workers or anyone else for that matter believes in them? Was reading some stats about the US this morning and it was something like 41% of Americans think dinosaurs and humans co-existed. Guess that's what comes when Creationism is allowed to be taught as a science.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 16:05:55 GMT -5
Shhhh, Snow! Not yet! Wait until after the Supreme Court of the U.S. rules in favor of same-sex marriage tomorrow. Then we can start advocating for polygamy next week! LOL well I heard today that the Supreme Court of the US rules in favor of same-sex Marriage! That is awesome. I laughed though when I heard people were going to move to Canada because of the ruling. I imagine they will have to turn around and head somewhere else once they figure out we've had same sex marriage in Canada for some time now, and, it's legal! a sad day for my country, just another sign o' the times...
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 16:30:24 GMT -5
Shhhh, Snow! Not yet! Wait until after the Supreme Court of the U.S. rules in favor of same-sex marriage tomorrow. Then we can start advocating for polygamy next week! LOL well I heard today that the Supreme Court of the US rules in favor of same-sex Marriage! That is awesome. I laughed though when I heard people were going to move to Canada because of the ruling. I imagine they will have to turn around and head somewhere else once they figure out we've had same sex marriage in Canada for some time now, and, it's legal! That's hilarious!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 16:33:35 GMT -5
Shhhh, Snow! Not yet! Wait until after the Supreme Court of the U.S. rules in favor of same-sex marriage tomorrow. Then we can start advocating for polygamy next week! LOL well I heard today that the Supreme Court of the US rules in favor of same-sex Marriage! That is awesome. I laughed though when I heard people were going to move to Canada because of the ruling. I imagine they will have to turn around and head somewhere else once they figure out we've had same sex marriage in Canada for some time now, and, it's legal! A 60-year old gay friend sent me a text: "Should David (his 38-yr. old gay son) and I go get married real quick to be the first father and son to do so, just so we can p**s off the right?" I responded: "I think you should marry both David and Katie (his 36-year old straight daughter) at the same time--and maybe your cat, too--; you might as well go for the slippery slope trifecta!"
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 26, 2015 17:07:43 GMT -5
LOL well I heard today that the Supreme Court of the US rules in favor of same-sex Marriage! That is awesome. I laughed though when I heard people were going to move to Canada because of the ruling. I imagine they will have to turn around and head somewhere else once they figure out we've had same sex marriage in Canada for some time now, and, it's legal! a sad day for my country, just another sign o' the times... I'm sorry you're sad about something that will bring so much joy to people's lives Wally.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 20:41:49 GMT -5
Once again, gays don't reproduce. The unique, life-giving union of man and woman is the primary thing to be celebrated about marriage. High society is far to narcissistic to consider it today, but originally, reproduction was thought to be a gift of God.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 20:47:32 GMT -5
Once again, gays don't reproduce. The unique, life-giving union of man and woman is the primary thing to be celebrated about marriage. High society is far to narcissistic to consider it today, but originally, reproduction was thought to be a gift of God. Very true. We should celebrate straight marriages and their life-giving reproductive unions, not least because if it weren't for them, God's gift of gays to the globe would die out.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 20:57:11 GMT -5
And if you believe that you will respect people who have reservations about celebrating your marriages and not insist that they cater your wedding, for example.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 21:08:43 GMT -5
And if you believe that you will respect people who have reservations about celebrating your marriages and not insist that they cater your wedding, for example. Yes, I would, actually. I wouldn't want to give my business to someone who found me morally repugnant, and I would hope they would have the fortitude to tell me so, to my face, if I were to offer to engage their services.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 21:13:27 GMT -5
Its all about you, isn't it. Typical atheist!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 21:23:42 GMT -5
Its all about you, isn't it. Typical atheist! Ummmm..... I thought your question was about me: Should I instead have responded from your point of view, or Bert's, or Donald Duck's, or God's or...?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 21:30:58 GMT -5
God's
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 21:38:19 GMT -5
Fair enough. Here you go: God said:
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2015 21:38:41 GMT -5
When morals began to loosen up after WWII people were saying this would never happen. Not only are we in a social experiment, but our experimenters don't have a clue.
Oh, I know, Bert! I know! Isn't it just too terrible?
I can remember before WWII, when any decent woman should wear a hat & gloves when she even stepped out the door! (+ girdle, which was out of sight of course, but would be never-the-less be easily be discerned if it wasn't there)
Now look! Oh, the ignominy, the shame, of it!
No hats, no gloves! What self respecting woman would ever go hat-less, glove-less and God forbid! -obviously no girdle!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 21:44:38 GMT -5
When morals began to loosen up after WWII people were saying this would never happen. Not only are we in a social experiment, but our experimenters don't have a clue.
Oh, I know, Bert! I know! Isn't it just too terrible?
I can remember before WWII, when any decent woman should wear a hat & gloves when she even stepped out the door! (+ girdle, which was out of sight of course, but would be never-the-less be easily be discerned if it wasn't there)
Now look! Oh, the ignominy, the shame, of it!
No hats, no gloves! What self respecting woman would ever go hat-less, glove-less and God forbid! -obviously no girdle!
Personally, I find girdles the epitome of sexism in haberdashery. I'm quickly approaching the age when carbohydrates and gravity are taking their toll, and a girdle would come in quite handy, if only they made one for men.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2015 21:53:45 GMT -5
Once again, gays don't reproduce. The unique, life-giving union of man and woman is the primary thing to be celebrated about marriage. High society is far to narcissistic to consider it today, but originally, reproduction was thought to be a gift of God. Whoa! Lee, "gays don't reproduce?"
Let's back up a bit to Gene's post.
"A 60-year old gay friend sent me a text: "Should David (his 38-yr. old gay son) and I go get married real quick to be the first father and son to do so, just so we can p**s off the right?"
"I responded: "I think you should marry both David and Katie (his 36-year old straight daughter) at the same time--and maybe your cat, too--; you might as well go for the slippery slope trifecta!"
Now, I am scratching my head a bit but if I have figured that out properly, Gene's friend was gay, yet he had a son & an daughter. Right ?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 26, 2015 21:57:37 GMT -5
Once again, gays don't reproduce. The unique, life-giving union of man and woman is the primary thing to be celebrated about marriage. High society is far to narcissistic to consider it today, but originally, reproduction was thought to be a gift of God. Whoa! Lee, "gays don't reproduce?"
Let's back up a bit to Gene's post.
"A 60-year old gay friend sent me a text: "Should David (his 38-yr. old gay son) and I go get married real quick to be the first father and son to do so, just so we can p**s off the right?"
"I responded: "I think you should marry both David and Katie (his 36-year old straight daughter) at the same time--and maybe your cat, too--; you might as well go for the slippery slope trifecta!"
Now, I am scratching my head a bit but if I have figured that out properly, Gene's friend was gay, yet he had a son & an daughter. Right ?
Yep. Gay, married as a young man to a woman when he was trying to go straight, had two kids, eventually divorced, currently is the patriarch of his home, and his ex-wife, daughter and grandson live in his home. His boyfriend and his ex-wife are best friends.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2015 22:04:57 GMT -5
ps do Workers believe in Neanderthals? Do you think Neanderthals care if workers or anyone else for that matter believes in them? Was reading some stats about the US this morning and it was something like 41% of Americans think dinosaurs and humans co-existed. Guess that's what comes when Creationism is allowed to be taught as a science. Maybe it comes from allowing my cousin to marry that Neanderthal with his under-developed brain capacity! I tried to warn her!
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 22:14:13 GMT -5
Fair enough. Here you go: God said: You're still answering out of your self-concern. Was marriage instituted by God to celebrate the hetero-sexual union or that of same-sex attraction? How can you pretend an answer if you don't believe in him?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 26, 2015 22:15:17 GMT -5
Once again, gays don't reproduce. The unique, life-giving union of man and woman is the primary thing to be celebrated about marriage. High society is far to narcissistic to consider it today, but originally, reproduction was thought to be a gift of God. Whoa! Lee, "gays don't reproduce?"
Let's back up a bit to Gene's post.
"A 60-year old gay friend sent me a text: "Should David (his 38-yr. old gay son) and I go get married real quick to be the first father and son to do so, just so we can p**s off the right?"
"I responded: "I think you should marry both David and Katie (his 36-year old straight daughter) at the same time--and maybe your cat, too--; you might as well go for the slippery slope trifecta!"
Now, I am scratching my head a bit but if I have figured that out properly, Gene's friend was gay, yet he had a son & an daughter. Right ?
You're making my point: not in the context of a vital, hetero-sexual marriage.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2015 22:21:42 GMT -5
Whoa! Lee, "gays don't reproduce?"
Let's back up a bit to Gene's post.
"A 60-year old gay friend sent me a text: "Should David (his 38-yr. old gay son) and I go get married real quick to be the first father and son to do so, just so we can p**s off the right?"
"I responded: "I think you should marry both David and Katie (his 36-year old straight daughter) at the same time--and maybe your cat, too--; you might as well go for the slippery slope trifecta!"
Now, I am scratching my head a bit but if I have figured that out properly, Gene's friend was gay, yet he had a son & an daughter. Right ?
Yep. Gay, married as a young man to a woman when he was trying to go straight, had two kids, eventually divorced, currently is the patriarch of his home, and his ex-wife, daughter and grandson live in his home. His boyfriend and his ex-wife are best friends. Ah, how sweet, Gene!
Sounds like one big happy family!
Sounds like the type family that Lee advocates is the right kind for our society.
|
|