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.
Those are still men to women, just multiple women to take care of multiple children created by said union. I have no issue with polygamy within the structure of this religion.
The picture is what you want this country to be. The picture represents a time when people who are like you were in charge. The others knew their place. This is what you want to return to. What that picture doesn't show is the way it really was for lots of people.
You got ALL of that from a picture? Good Lord, I'd hate to see your therapy bills.
Who are you addressing, because I haven't said anything that you typed. P.S. "Group think" is a hallmark of political correctness with is a near religion to you Neo Progs.
You show no understanding of the meaning of "political correctness." It means an orthodoxy of thought, one in which contrary opinions are not tolerated. Do you know how many of your comrades react when someone says something remotely critical of soldiers or the military? That's political correctness. Things that are said that some group thinks should not even be uttered. Along those same lines, many of your comrades will become offended when someone questions their religious beliefs. That is also political correctness.
BTW, why do so many of you religious types so frequently denigrate religion? It does not escape my notice that you frequently condemn science as, itself, a religion. When you do this, you are clearly not issuing a compliment. If I were religious, the last thing I would do is call science a "religion." Or atheism, as many of you also do. So, when you classify "political correctness" (which in your mind is synonymous with "liberalism") as a religion, you are taking the odd step of denigrating religion itself. Why do you folks do this? I've seen it many times.
Who are you addressing, because I haven't said anything that you typed. P.S. "Group think" is a hallmark of political correctness with is a near religion to you Neo Progs.
Why call names? Did I call you one? Answer the question please. Smaller Government or Religious big Government keeping all of them under control?
Thread title says it all. If you support redefining marriage, do you support a mother marrying her daughter, if they both are consenting adults? Or a father and son? Why or why not? Thanks
Obviously the idea is instantly repulsive to people, which is of course why you asked the question.
However, objectively, I can't think of a reason why not to "support" it in the sense of refusing to outlaw it.
Beyond it being disgusting, the practical reason for an incest taboo is that any offspring will be at greater risk for birth defects. So one would prohibit it the same way many people consider it child abuse for a pregnant woman to take drugs.
In the case of a same sex relationship, though, there will be no offspring. So I'm not sure what basis there would be for being against it beyond the fact that I personally don't like it.
Incest is sexual abuse and dysfunction. "many nonhuman animal species and all known primates, have an evolved tendency to avoid matting between close relatives" Abnormal Psychology Core Concepts,pg 347
Many words have several definitions and many sources have already been printing a definition of marriage that uses the phrase "two people." I think marriage is limited between two people who are legally allowed to have sexual relations or enter into a legal contract..
Why call names? Did I call you one? Answer the question please. Smaller Government or Religious big Government keeping all of them under control?
What name? Neo Prog is just the other side of Neo Con. Btw, you may not have called me any specific names, but in several threads you've implied that I'm a racist, bigot, etc. Sounds like you suffer from a case of "candishycan'ttakey-itis.
Obviously the idea is instantly repulsive to people, which is of course why you asked the question.
However, objectively, I can't think of a reason why not to "support" it in the sense of refusing to outlaw it.
Beyond it being disgusting, the practical reason for an incest taboo is that any offspring will be at greater risk for birth defects. So one would prohibit it the same way many people consider it child abuse for a pregnant woman to take drugs.
In the case of a same sex relationship, though, there will be no offspring. So I'm not sure what basis there would be for being against it beyond the fact that I personally don't like it.
A, Keep your hands out of their wombs, that's their decision NOT yours.
B. Homosexual sex may lead to AIDS. Do you not think that gay couples are not able to handle this situation in an intelligent fashion?
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.
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.
