Verified:

Atryn Game profile

Member
2149

Oct 5th 2015, 19:22:16

Originally posted by tellarion:
Non-religious people get married too, you know. Or people from a variety of religions that do not at all agree with each other. I think the opposite is happening here: Conservative Christians are taking what is and has been a fundamental aspect of HUMANITY for generations and stamping their own label on it, then saying nobody else can touch it. That's like me licking a cookie and saying 'it's mine!'.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage <--show me where it mentions religion?


LOL... I *am* a non-religious person that got married, so you don't need to tell me that happens. But I would have been just as happy with a civil union if that option had existed. I didn't go to a church to get married. As far as the state is concerned, my appearance before a judge was enough.

But to suggest that marriage has no religious context is just nuts. You cannot toss out thousands of years of history and say they just "misappropriated the term". Who is they? That is exactly the point. Lots of different religions use the term with lots of different definitions. Trying to then apply a civil standard to that in a pluralistic society like the U.S. - it isn't surprising we have conflicts emerging.

H4xOr WaNgEr Game profile

Forum Moderator
1971

Oct 5th 2015, 20:49:13

Originally posted by Atryn:
Originally posted by tellarion:
Non-religious people get married too, you know. Or people from a variety of religions that do not at all agree with each other. I think the opposite is happening here: Conservative Christians are taking what is and has been a fundamental aspect of HUMANITY for generations and stamping their own label on it, then saying nobody else can touch it. That's like me licking a cookie and saying 'it's mine!'.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage <--show me where it mentions religion?


LOL... I *am* a non-religious person that got married, so you don't need to tell me that happens. But I would have been just as happy with a civil union if that option had existed. I didn't go to a church to get married. As far as the state is concerned, my appearance before a judge was enough.

But to suggest that marriage has no religious context is just nuts. You cannot toss out thousands of years of history and say they just "misappropriated the term". Who is they? That is exactly the point. Lots of different religions use the term with lots of different definitions. Trying to then apply a civil standard to that in a pluralistic society like the U.S. - it isn't surprising we have conflicts emerging.


I'm tired of people arguing that marriage is a religious institution. Marriage predates mono-theism and its connection to religion is secondary -- in that originally, all aspects of life were mixed with the pagan religions (from marriage to planting crops, hunting, giving birth, etc.)

Unless you intend to argue that hunting and gathering food, planting crops, child birth, and rights of passage such as "coming to age" etc. are all religious institutions (they aren't), then you have no case for arguing that marriage is a strictly religious institution. Asking the "god of fertility" or whoever else to bless a union does not make marriage a religious institution anymore than it makes farming a religious institution for asking the gods to bless your crops, or asking the gods for good crop bearing weather.

Originally marriage was about securing breeding rights with a woman and in doing so, trying to mitigate the risks for men in raising and providing for a child that may not be theirs (cuckold avoidance).

Edited By: H4xOr WaNgEr on Oct 5th 2015, 20:53:02
See Original Post

tellarion Game profile

Member
3906

Oct 6th 2015, 11:37:10

Originally posted by H4xOr WaNgEr:
Originally posted by Atryn:
Originally posted by tellarion:
Non-religious people get married too, you know. Or people from a variety of religions that do not at all agree with each other. I think the opposite is happening here: Conservative Christians are taking what is and has been a fundamental aspect of HUMANITY for generations and stamping their own label on it, then saying nobody else can touch it. That's like me licking a cookie and saying 'it's mine!'.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage <--show me where it mentions religion?


LOL... I *am* a non-religious person that got married, so you don't need to tell me that happens. But I would have been just as happy with a civil union if that option had existed. I didn't go to a church to get married. As far as the state is concerned, my appearance before a judge was enough.

But to suggest that marriage has no religious context is just nuts. You cannot toss out thousands of years of history and say they just "misappropriated the term". Who is they? That is exactly the point. Lots of different religions use the term with lots of different definitions. Trying to then apply a civil standard to that in a pluralistic society like the U.S. - it isn't surprising we have conflicts emerging.


I'm tired of people arguing that marriage is a religious institution. Marriage predates mono-theism and its connection to religion is secondary -- in that originally, all aspects of life were mixed with the pagan religions (from marriage to planting crops, hunting, giving birth, etc.)

Unless you intend to argue that hunting and gathering food, planting crops, child birth, and rights of passage such as "coming to age" etc. are all religious institutions (they aren't), then you have no case for arguing that marriage is a strictly religious institution. Asking the "god of fertility" or whoever else to bless a union does not make marriage a religious institution anymore than it makes farming a religious institution for asking the gods to bless your crops, or asking the gods for good crop bearing weather.

Originally marriage was about securing breeding rights with a woman and in doing so, trying to mitigate the risks for men in raising and providing for a child that may not be theirs (cuckold avoidance).


Exactly what I was saying. This whole idea that marriage is a religious institution is a crock of fluff. Yes, Christianity and other forms of religion have their own way of celebrating and granting marriages, but the entire concept of marriage goes back to the very roots of our civilization and, as you said, predates every religion in existence.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Oct 6th 2015, 11:48:38

Telling religious flufftards that their ideals arnt the center of the universe never works out well.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

tellarion Game profile

Member
3906

Oct 6th 2015, 11:53:05

Bikerman Game profile

Member
555

Oct 6th 2015, 17:39:39

Originally posted by Angel1:
We all know the story of who Kim Davis is and what she has done



Hmmm, I don't

Junky Game profile

Member
1815

Oct 15th 2015, 20:03:53

for arguments sake... why is this in AT...
I Maybe Crazy... But atleast I'm crazy.

Heston Game profile

Member
4766

Oct 15th 2015, 20:09:34

It was dead for 10 days until you resurrected this bullfluff.
Supose you could say the same thing in every thread.
Sup junky
❤️️Nothing but❤️️💯❤️️❤️️🌺🌸🌹❤️❤️💯

Junky Game profile

Member
1815

Oct 15th 2015, 20:55:26

:-D, that's me :-P I guess that is correct, a lot of off topic topics goin on around here.
I Maybe Crazy... But atleast I'm crazy.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Oct 15th 2015, 21:12:01

because this is the most active board and the best chance to get a debate going?

dont like it, dont click on it. pretty simple.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford