Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-04-2013, 08:46 PM
 
Location: 9851 Meadowglen Lane, Apt 42, Houston Texas
3,168 posts, read 2,062,681 times
Reputation: 368

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
Yes. And it's not 'matrimony'
You left out the key sentence, let me help you:

The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for "husband" and in the feminine form for "wife."[11]

 
Old 03-04-2013, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,633,814 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
A man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman is more similar to a man/woman marrying a rock than a man marrying a woman to society.

In other words, homosexual unions are completely superfluous to our existence just as man/rock unions.
Obviously, in dreaming up your point, you didn't bother considering that a rock can not sign a marriage license.
 
Old 03-04-2013, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,633,814 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
It's open to homosexuals just as it's to heterosexuals. What is not fundamental to our existence is homosexual unions. The human race would continue without them but would die out without heterosexual unions.
Why would a homosexual want to marry and heterosexual and vice versa?
 
Old 03-04-2013, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,285 posts, read 15,302,626 times
Reputation: 6658
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
You left out the key sentence, let me help you:

The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for "husband" and in the feminine form for "wife."[11]


Uhh...no.

You also left out a big part

Quote:
The related word "matrimony" derives from the Old French word matremoine which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium which combines the two concepts mater meaning "mother" and the suffix -monium signifying "action, state, or condition.
Quote:
The word "marriage" derives from Middle English mariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE This in turn is derived from Old French marier

So,
The word 'matrimony' is derived from the OF 'matremoine' which came into usage in 1300 CE
The word 'marriage' is derived from the OF 'marier' which came into usage in 1250-1300 CE

The word 'matremoine' derives from the Latin 'mātrimōnium'
The word 'marier' derives from the Latin 'marītāre'



Thus, the word 'marriage' did not derive from the word 'matrimonium'.



You're smart enough to understand this.
The question is if you are willing to admit that you are wrong?
 
Old 03-04-2013, 09:04 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,633,814 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
I picked a man and a rock to find the most ridiculous union I could think of.

And as strange as that union is, it has about the same function to society as a homosexual union. Both are superfluous to anything.
You've fallen off the deep end to absurdity. Haven't you heard two heads are better than one? I don't think the addition of a rock makes one head any better.
 
Old 03-05-2013, 07:57 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,732,593 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
That was the origin of why society supports Marriage. In the word Marriage is the root motherhood.

And we don't want homosexuals breaking up heterosexual unions just to have kids. That's the opposite of what we want.
Again (and boy is this getting tiring) - I've been married, and will soon be married again, and I do not intend on having any children.
 
Old 03-05-2013, 08:00 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,732,593 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
The word "marriage" derives from Middle English mariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE This in turn is derived from Old French marier (to marry) and ultimately Latin marītāre meaning to provide with a husband or wife and marītāri meaning to get married. The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for "husband" and in the feminine form for "wife."[11] The related word "matrimony" derives from the Old French word matremoine which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium which combines the two concepts mater meaning "mother" and the suffix -monium signifying "action, state, or condition." "[12]

Marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have been married, and will be married again, and I didn't have kids before, and don't intend on ever having children. Prefixes do not determine how an institution functions.
 
Old 03-05-2013, 11:25 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,772,641 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
I picked a man and a rock to find the most ridiculous union I could think of.

And as strange as that union is, it has about the same function to society as a homosexual union. Both are superfluous to anything.
How is this family superfluous? Why do you denigrate this family just because it doesn't conform to your concept?

http://www.usmagazine.com/uploads/as...ns-article.jpg

Last edited by CaseyB; 03-05-2013 at 02:36 PM.. Reason: copyright violation
 
Old 03-05-2013, 11:31 AM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,253,192 times
Reputation: 6476
What a lovely picture.

I never get tired of seeing pictures of loving families.
 
Old 03-05-2013, 11:36 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,732,593 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
How is this family superfluous? Why do you denigrate this family just because it doesn't conform to your concept?
Beautiful family! Betcha those kids are super loved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:19 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top