Now playing on dirty.radio: Loading...

  Dirty Forums > world.

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 06-24-2008, 03:38 PM
cacophony
disquietude
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 893
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO KILL ANIMALS FOR FOOD WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO KILL PEOPLE FOR FOOD!!!!! slippery slope.

look, the specific quality that makes a society a society is an agreed upon set of rules regarding acts that are either acceptable or unacceptable to enough of the population to justify the thought process. gay marriage was not legal in the 50s because not enough of the population existed that accepted it to justify the thought process. these days it's a different story, and that's why it's changing now. it's not like 90% of the population is against homosexual unions and these changes are moving ahead anyway. over 50% of americans approve of civil union and almost 35% of the population approves of the idea of gay marriage. the scales tip because enough of the public opinion supports it.

it's not a logic puzzle. you can't go "well if a man can marry a man, why can't a man marry three women and a goat?" it's not about teasing out the logical connections. it's about societal support. societies don't operate strictly on cold logical conclusions. our system of laws is a rather emotional thing. all this navel gazing about the justification of incest is silly until enough of the population sees the justification of the thought process and the wheels of change start rolling in that direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skie View Post
It's obvious marriage means less in society today than it did 10 years ago, let alone 20 or 30 years ago.
is it obvious? or is that the conclusion you've drawn based on your pre-existing bias? consider that marriage as an institution is no more healthy today than it was 50 years ago, but the barriers to divorce and re-marriage have lowered significantly. 50 years ago if your husband punched you in the eye, you stuck around until death do you part. if your wife was a raging alcoholic you mixed her drinks and helped her to bed (thank you to my grandparents for setting that example). adultery is not an invention of the 20th century. what's an invention of the 20th century is rights for women who otherwise would have had no recourse in miserable or unhealthy marriages.
  #22  
Old 06-24-2008, 11:09 PM
Skie
river
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 22
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Quote:
Originally Posted by cacophony View Post
look, the specific quality that makes a society a society is an agreed upon set of rules regarding acts that are either acceptable or unacceptable to enough of the population to justify the thought process.
But didn't the California supreme court go against the majority of voters by allowing same-sex marriage? So, in other words the agreed upon set of acceptable rules was overturned by people who "know better"? If they didn't come across this determination by a means other than "teasing out the logical connections" then what means did they use? Did they use the "squeaky wheel gets the grease" method or was it simply from flipping a coin?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacophony View Post
consider that marriage as an institution is no more healthy today than it was 50 years ago, but the barriers to divorce and re-marriage have lowered significantly. 50 years ago if your husband punched you in the eye, you stuck around until death do you part. if your wife was a raging alcoholic you mixed her drinks and helped her to bed (thank you to my grandparents for setting that example). adultery is not an invention of the 20th century. what's an invention of the 20th century is rights for women who otherwise would have had no recourse in miserable or unhealthy marriages.
So, battered spouses, alcoholism, drug-use, etc. are the main causes of divorce? This doesn't match too well the top four reasons for a divorce; money (problems), in-laws, religion (differences), and children (whether to have, how to raise, and number of). It seems to me the big difference, between now and 50 years ago is that it's much easier to leave than to work out your differences.

It's great that people can get out of bad situation with divorce. But, that paints a much more grim picture if you're saying that the 10% of the population that's divorced and a large portion of the 33% of people who can't even make it to year 10 are because they finally divorce their abusive, alcoholic, or drug-addicted spouse? And, you're saying that this large percentage of disfunctionality is nothing new to society and was the same 50 years ago.
  #23  
Old 06-24-2008, 11:16 PM
IsiliRunite
de la Michigan
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ann Arbor
Posts: 536
Send a message via AIM to IsiliRunite
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Sounds like un-noted incompatibility causes all divorces...

I'm out of this topic.
  #24  
Old 06-25-2008, 06:35 AM
cacophony
disquietude
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 893
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skie View Post
But didn't the California supreme court go against the majority of voters by allowing same-sex marriage?
where did i use or imply the word "majority"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skie View Post
So, battered spouses, alcoholism, drug-use, etc. are the main causes of divorce?
didn't say that either. so congrats on your reading comprehension skills.

i'm skipping the rest of your post because it asks questions based on assertions i never made.
  #25  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:05 AM
Sean
Where in the world...?
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: US
Posts: 1,437
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skie View Post
It's obvious marriage means less in society today than it did 10 years ago, let alone 20 or 30 years ago.
Well you're still asserting this without offering anything to refute the reasons I gave why marriage is still an important institution in modern society. All you've said is that you think my point has been "run into the ground", and then said that some people get divorced. Simply because some people are flippant about marriage doesn't diminish the importance of it as an institution. People are flippant with all kinds of things that are still important. I'll re-post my opening points, and maybe you can address them:


As far as I'm concerned, there was a time and place for advocating only male-female marriages, but it's looooong gone. I tend to look at these things from an evolutionary point of view, and while in the distant past it was a necessity for human survival that we procreate, we really don't face any threat of extinction from dwindling numbers at this point in human history. So marriage between a man and woman that's centered around the idea of populating the planet with our species has rightly evolved to be much more of a social foundation in which procreation is no longer necessary for survival. In fact, there are probably too many people on the planet as it is, so if anything, we could do with a little less baby-makin'. In my opinion, this is one of those issues where the church will end up clinging to the mindset of the past loooooong after the practicality of that mindset has gone bye-bye - like when they executed people who said things like the earth wasn't actually at the center of the universe.

In this current reality, I think that what's important to marriage's survival is more that it be between people who love each other, and who are willing to take on the commitment that pledging your companionship to someone for a lifetime requires. It's an institution that helps us mature as a society by teaching us the importance of being responsible for someone and something other than ourselves, being faithful to them by honoring our publicly stated commitments, and being there to support each other through difficult times. These values are absolutely essential to our positive survival as a society, but are not unique to a heterosexual relationship the way that creating a baby is.
__________________
Download all my remixes

Last edited by Sean; 06-25-2008 at 09:13 AM.
  #26  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:08 AM
Strangelet
rico suave
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lost in a romance
Posts: 815
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
i would say the institution of marriage has only been improved from what it was 50 years ago, not diminished in purpose or importance.

Along with what Cacophony said about divorce being more accessible, the purpose of marriage has shifted from practical/financial/social importance to emotional/personal importance. This effectively means that, while marriage is no longer socially enforced so stringently, society actually benefits more by people choosing to bond on more personally relevant reasons.

Personally I only got married to ensure my foreigner girl friend and I could be together without politics coming between us. Otherwise I don't think I really would have. But what started out as a formality brought out a framework of support, intimacy, and social engagement that did not exist otherwise. Things I wouldn't like to get rid of any time soon.

Why I wouldn't have married otherwise has a lot to do with growing up mormon, the same organization that has now sent what is basically a papal bull to the 750,000 california members to derail the same sex marriage through "time and means"

This same society saw me as a threat while I was single, forces people to choose between living like a chaste eunuch or marrying molly mormon down in ward 112 and having 6 kids in the time span of 6 * 9 = 54 months. Only to find that you were just horny and wanted to please your parents. Which explains why all of my copious siblings have all been married on average 2.4 times.

It took forever to deprogram my thinking to salvage a good institution of marriage from this mess. And the success of this process is all because I love my wife.

So to come full circle, perhaps people who would argue against gay marriage or its relevance, are still blinded by the same social structures that have caused such damage to something that is saved by individual expression.

just saying...
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it."

- Mark Twain

  #27  
Old 06-25-2008, 11:21 AM
cacophony
disquietude
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 893
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
as a society we cling to this pseudo-historical neo-precious view of marriage as this sweet devoted lifelong institution where gramma baked and grandpa smoked a pipe and everyone celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary with a fluffy white cake with silver and gold candles.

marriage is no "worse" an institution than it was a hundred years ago.
  #28  
Old 06-26-2008, 12:46 AM
Skie
river
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 22
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Quote:
Originally Posted by cacophony View Post
where did i use or imply the word "majority"?
You're right, you only stated "enough" allowing the number of people in society to make something acceptable or unacceptable be as low as one. Or "enough" could require all. Ultra vague and noncommittal for the win!

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacophony View Post
didn't say that either. so congrats on your reading comprehension skills.
What I inferred from your post has been refuted. Instead of clarifying your point of view, you've decided to leave under the guise of my lack of reading comprehension skills. It seems futile to attempt any further dialog with you.
  #29  
Old 06-26-2008, 01:15 AM
Skie
river
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 22
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Sean, it's not that your point has been "run into the ground", it's that I think marriage as an institution has. The number of people who are "flippant" about marriage is increasing and while this could suddenly change, I don't see it coming without some significant changes to society. On top of that, there seems to be a trend where couples aren't even bothering getting married. It appears to me that marriage is being taken less and less seriously every day.

It seems to me that the value isn't in marriage, but in the character of the people who maintain their vows.
  #30  
Old 06-26-2008, 01:27 AM
Skie
river
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 22
Re: California overturns ban on same-sex marriage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelet View Post
Personally I only got married to ensure my foreigner girl friend and I could be together without politics coming between us. Otherwise I don't think I really would have. But what started out as a formality brought out a framework of support, intimacy, and social engagement that did not exist otherwise. Things I wouldn't like to get rid of any time soon.
I can understand the benefit of marriage to nationalize a foreigner. But, what aspects of marriage "brought out a framework of support, intimacy, and social engagement"?
Post Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.