|
Post by keystroker on Apr 13, 2013 5:37:43 GMT -7
Not according to one of the spokespeople for far right wing Catholics, Bill Donohue:
He likes to laugh after making judgmental pronouncements. Kind of reminds me of someone I know...
|
|
Buckeye
New Member
The Game's Afoot
Posts: 336
|
Post by Buckeye on Apr 13, 2013 5:46:20 GMT -7
OOPS. I messed up this post.
|
|
|
Post by keystroker on Apr 13, 2013 7:31:28 GMT -7
OOPS. I messed up this post. Is that a commentary on people who have been married and divorced multiple times?
|
|
|
Post by keystroker on Apr 14, 2013 11:51:34 GMT -7
If no one answers procreation then that means the forum is going to have to recognize C. listillo and Bobby Scott's cohabitation as a marriage.
|
|
|
Post by jiminix on Apr 14, 2013 14:53:01 GMT -7
Humans are a pair-bonding species.
Maybe that's biological, maybe it's only an artifact of civilization. Either way, it's a fact about modern humans.
Humans also are a social species, living together in extended communities, and dependent for survival on acceptance by the community.
So, as human society evolved and developed governments, the social recognition and acceptance of a family unit came to be formalized as a legal marriage.
That's what marriage is today, and what it always has been through recorded history.
The only thing that has changed is who the institution of marriage has been available to. In some times and places, it was available to a man and multiple wives. The central human family of Hindu mythology had five brothers married simultaneously to one woman. Roman law provided for marriage of two men (Nero, for example, at different times married three women and two men), and from the walls of pyramids, it appears Egyptian law may have likewise.
Anti-gay activists always refer to same sex marriage as "redefining marriage for everyone". Of course, there is no redefining. The definition of marriage didn't change when it became available to interracial couples, and it's doesn't change now when it becomes available to same-sex couples.
Any couple can "marry" (have a ceremony) in any state. But that marriage can only be licensed and legally recognized in 9 states. It is that legal status, and society's endorsement that goes with it, that we are having a debate about. Religious views of either marriage or homosexuality should have no relevance to the debate. But the anti-gay side will not drop it.
Love, of course, is the one essential ingredient of a sincere marrige. But without society's acceptance, it is a bleak and pernicious prospect.
|
|