Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
I understand perfectly but there is some part of me that just can't look away like driving by a car accident.
I just gotta see what kind of garbage is spewed forth in response to my comments.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Marriage and sexuality
- Thread starter Kerr
- Start date
I understand perfectly but there is some part of me that just can't look away like driving by a car accident.
I just gotta see what kind of garbage is spewed forth in response to my comments.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Since this book was published, animals have learned to communicate with humans via sign language, too. And we didn't know about sterile technique for surgery, nor did we know how diease was communicated. And we were still using leeches freely. Shall we all just reside in the wonderful 19th century?
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Yeah. With real cocaine. How smart is that! Housewives were getting hooked on it.they had coca cola back in 1891 though
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And the models weren't nearly so good-looking.they had coca cola back in 1891 though
madhatter85
Transhumanist
Marriage is implied monogamy. They go hand in hand.Are you under the laughable misapprehension that humans exhibit monogamy?* snort*. Dude, you really need to get out more.
The argument is that two people can make a "lifelong commitment together." How is that not implied monogamy? Why do you want our marriage so bad then if you want to define it separately?
madhatter85
Transhumanist
Monogamous animal homosexual relationships end in extinction of that line. How is that a good thing? Monogamous relationships in animals are for propagation and care of the progeny. Clearly, nature got flawed up when two male penguins start trying to produce offspring.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
And once again madhatter demonstrates an utter inability to admit factual error.
ragordon168
Active Member
what about polygamy? thats defined as more than two people in a marriage and it is still considered 'better' above gay marriage.
so a straight guy is allowed to marry 7 women but a guy gay isnt even allowed to marry once?
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
educate yourself more....
this really is not true
you are of course discussing the small confines of your own experience...
NOT the world as it is....
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
*ahem* Mormons *ahem*
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
he's obcessed with penises going in vaginas....
I really do think this obcession is indicative of a deeper problem
one that involves him really liking or wanting somethign else in his life.
Or maybe the matter is far more shallow and less well thought out...
misanthropic_clown
Active Member
@madhatter: I thought I had better quote this if Auto is on your ignore. That was in response to your marriage = monogamy point. If marriage implied monogamy, how can you explain polygamy in the early LDS church?
Last edited:
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
those were proto mormons, not real ones...
like the klingons in orignal star trek and klingons in next generation
Its 19th century...right up hatter's alley....
More Wives Than One offers an in-depth look at the long-term interaction between belief and the practice of polygamy, or plural marriage, among the Latter-day Saints. Focusing on the small community of Manti, Utah, Kathryn M. Daynes provides an intimate view of how Mormon doctrine and Utah laws on marriage and divorce were applied in people's lives.
"Kathryn M. Daynes's book is the most important study to date of plural marriage in nineteenth-century Utah and is especially significant for its detailed analysis of the demographics of Mormonism's 'peculiar institution.'"--American Historical Review
"The scope of Kathryn Daynes's book is truly breathtaking and richly deserves being honored. . . . Clearly, this book is absolutely essential for anyone who wants to understand Mormonism's nineteenth-century marriage relationships."--Journal of Mormon History
"Daynes's excellent study of the rise and decline of polygamy in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an important contribution to our understanding of Mormonism. . . . Subtle and informative, Daynes's book is social history at its best."--Religious Studies Review
"The most complete and methodical account of Mormon polygamy to date. . . . More than any previous work, More Wives Than One provides scholars and general readers specific information about the intersection between belief and practice of this often misconstrued marriage system."--Nova Religio
"Daynes has given us a clear and cogent explanation for the rules and regulations of the nineteenth-century Mormon marriage system. Daynes has also helped us understand the complexity of the interactions of the church, the law, and the family that shaped the system and necessitated its revisions. All subsequent study of this system must now begin with her work."--Western Historical Quarterly
"This superb book is far and away the best study of Mormon polygamy ever to appear. Kathryn Daynes provides a feast of information and historical context, summarizing and analyzing intelligently and with admirable balance virtually every issue that has ever been raised in connection with Mormon polygamy. This is a gem."--Dean L. May, author of Three Frontiers: Family, Land, and Society in the American West, 1850-1900
"Kathryn Daynes's More Wives Than One is the most authoritative account of Mormon 'plural marriage'--polygamy--ever written. A clear, engaging history of marriage in one nineteenth-century Mormon town, Manti, Utah, More Wives Than One offers an imaginative, thorough, and scrupulously fair account of Mormonism's most controversial spiritual practice in all its social and religious dimensions--a radiant example of scholarship's enlivening intellectual potential."--Jon Butler, author of Religion in Colonial America
"Kathryn Daynes has combined meticulous research into the lives of families in Manti, Utah, with a superb sense of the interaction between law and religion. This book is a multi-faceted jewel, illuminating the clashes of doctrine and legislation in nineteenth-century Utah, and the meaning that such clashes had in the lives of individuals. No prior book on polygamy has given us such a rich and thoughtful account of how the Mormon marriage system affected all of society, as well as those who lived the principle."--Sarah Barringer Gordon, author of The Mormon Question: Polygamy and Constitutional Conflict in Nineteenth-Century America
Kathryn M. Daynes, an associate professor of history at Brigham Young University, is a contributor to Nauvoo in Mormon History and Fulfilling the Founding: A Reader for American Heritage.
Alceste
Vagabond
Baloney. These guys can get married:
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=133984
And for those of us without a cuckold fetish:
source
I don't want your marriage (especially considering your views on sexuality) - I want mine, and I don't want you or the members of your cult abusing the powers of my secular government to interfere with it. But that's a moot point, because I'm straight, and even if I wasn't straight, I'm Canadian, so I get to marry whoever I want.
My marriage (if I marry) will be a lifelong familial partnership, but sexual monogamy is not a deal-breaker for me, as if it's any of your business. I could take it or leave it. My feelings for Wampus are much deeper and more complex and meaningful than mere sexual possessiveness.
Last edited:
ragordon168
Active Member
1 question madhatter. if your wife came up to you tomorrow and admited she was bi and wanted a threesome with you and her hot best friend -who is also bi - would you say no? because i cant think of any red blooded man that would. and technically its not cheating because shes there.
the only problem i could see you having is it voiding your marriage as of the 'implied monogomy' which went out the window for that.
the only problem i could see you having is it voiding your marriage as of the 'implied monogomy' which went out the window for that.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
I was excluding religious marriages considering their arguments that marriage existed before religion.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
Not that it is even relevant to the conversation. I would say :no:.
Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
Monogamous animal homosexual relationships end in extinction of that line. How is that a good thing? Monogamous relationships in animals are for propagation and care of the progeny. Clearly, nature got flawed up when two male penguins start trying to produce offspring.
That is not the argument. You specifically said, "Homosexual activity in animals is never monogamous as the breeding and care of offspring still depend on both sexes playing a role in the care of offspring. The only animals that exhibit monogamy are exclusively male-female for the production and care of offspring.
the statement that homosexuality is natural because animals do it does not apply to monogamous relationships, which is inherently what marriage is about."
In which case you were proven wrong by two different postings 493 and 498 specifically in which it was shown that male penguins will and do participate in a monogamous lifelong homosexual relationship in which, given the chance, will undoubtedly raise offspring as if they were a "normal" mating pair.
Also I believe your argument has been about survival of the species and not a particular genetic line. In this case homosexual couples have and do adopt children and raise them to be healthy productive people thus they do contribute to the survival of our species while in monogamous relationships.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
This is just bizarre logic. Plural wives in Utah in the 1890's weren't legally married? Plural wives in Saudi Arabia today aren't legally married? A huge percentage of cultures around the world practice polygamy, religious or otherwise, and they don't exist because...if they did, then madhatter would be wrong?
[wiki] So...wait for it...madhatter is factually wrong. I'm shocked, I tell you. And now we all wait for him to admit it. *goes to get sleeping bag and food stores*