Kwayera
Passive-aggressive Mod
Which just goes to show that marriage wasn't even marriage (or how you would define it) until the 14th century.
Lol.
Lol.
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/marriage.htmThe Grim Raper said:I'm pretty sure the egyptians and pagans did not have 'marriage'. They may have had a union of people under their god, with it's own specific rules and regulations, but they did not have 'marriage'.
Yes, marriage is only for heterosexual couples.Kwayera said:Well, lets see if I can tease it out.
- You think marriage is between hetersexual couples.
- You think the WORD marriage is only for heterosexual couples.
- You don't mind ('to an extent' - want to elaborate on that?) homosexual couples having a legal union, as long as they don't call it marriage.
Is that it? Is your only objection the fact that they want to call it marriage, be it religious or civil? Also given that Abrahamic religious don't have monopoly on the word and meaning of "marriage" and never did?
I'm sorry, are you trying to be sarcastic?CharlieB said:Yes, marriage is only for heterosexual couples.
Yes, Abrahamic religions have a monopoly over the term 'marriage'.
no u!dieburndie said:It's really irritating when people come in and spout opinions that have been refuted entirely several times in the thread as statements of fact.
A marriage is between three people: a man, a woman and God.jazzbaby said:i really couldnt care less about homosexual couples getting married
its up to them
lolfag.conics2008 said:gay marriage is just sick...
gay people are just mentally retarted and same goes for leso's...
all the gays/leso/trans and bisexual are just sick in the head, and please dont start with i was born like this, no you wern't you chose to become what you are...
So I'll ask the same question I ask everyone with this opinion.conics2008 said:gay marriage is just sick...
gay people are just mentally retarted and same goes for leso's...
all the gays/leso/trans and bisexual are just sick in the head, and please dont start with i was born like this, no you wern't you chose to become what you are...
NEINzimmerman8k said:I don't accept that it's intrinsically degrading either. As usual you give no reasons as to WHY it is degrading. I would contend that a man can love and care for more than one woman. Even if it is "degrading" in your opinion, they voluntarily consent to it. If they dont, there are existing laws to deal with this.
Homosexual couples can adopt and care for children that would otherwise be in institutionalised care. Well they could if primative laws were updated.
Tully: It doesn't matter if you find it weird or unnatural. You don't have a right to impose your beliefs and attitudes on others, particularly when their behaviour has no impact on you whatsoever.
Well that's just taking the stereotypical man-and-many-wives scenario. What if a woman wants a few husbands?Iron said:The concept of polygamy is patently degrading to women. It undermines their equality and independence (IN AN ECONOMIC SENSE TOO)
Not sure what youre on about on the second point dear fellow. In the homosexual context, the couple cannot create a family independently.