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.
Please, let's spare the BS. You obviously hate the institution of traditional marriage and are going to go to any ludicrous length to present it as an immoral and/or primitive institution.
On the contrary, I do not hate marriage. I am showing how it has changed multiple times in the US history
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Big deal! That and a dollar will get you a draw beer (at least in the joints I used to hang out in...where men routinely went home drunk and "raped" their wives).
Are you for real? Are you a man or woman? Are you married? If so, have you ever been raped by your spouse. Do you think men and women married rape each other and it should involve the criminal justice system. Tell me (us) your experience with "spousal rape" being even remotely the norm..?
I am a woman who has been married, and I'm still good friends with my ex.
I said that marital rape was not against the law at one time. There were laws passed that gave women the power to legally deal with that problem. If it wasn't a problem then they wouldn't have passed laws regarding it.
I think that if a man or woman DO rape their spouse then they should use the legal system. YOU are the one who seems to think that I mean every sex act in marriage is rape. I am talking about physically raping your spouse. They say no, and you still forcefully have sex with them THAT is rape.
IT has happened, it DOES happen, and it will continue to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Hell, do you have children of your own?
yes, but that has nothing to do with this discussion.
So he pretty much OWNED her. She could own no property. Had nothing that was legally considered hers. The husband also owned any children of the marriage.
It wasn't until 1839 in Mississippi that a woman could legally own property.
There was even a time in US history that a married woman could not have her own bank account without her husband signing for her.
So? That was mentioned above. But you presented it originally as if was a sibling relationship...and was the norm. How many states do NOT allow first cousin marriages?
I said marriages within the family. Cousins are family. I can't help it if you are trying to put words there that aren't there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
You are? Hell, I can hardly stop laughing. The definition -- in this country -- which is really all that matters -- is one between a man and woman. And any attempt to re-define it, has been soundly defeated at the voting booth (even in so-called "liberal" states).
And as I have shown the definition of marriage has been changed multiple times in US history. YOU are the one saying it hasn't. I have proven what I said is true.
As for voting. You don't get to vote on other peoples civil rights. Before you go there the USSC has repeatedly stated that marriage is a basic civil right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
How old are you? What kind of marriage are you in? What do you know about it, anyway? Do you have any children?
My age is none of your concern. I am in a partnership as my state doesn't recognize marriages from other states. And yes, we do have children. I probably know more about marriage as a religious, and as a civil institution than you ever will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Earth to you: Free institutions are the way they are because they contain an instrinsic wisdom and natural evolution within them, that just because it/they cannot be always articulated, does not mean the same are not the result of many years of collective experience. And that they seem to endure...which is something in itself...
I don't know what you mean by a free institution, but as a civil institution it has to be applied equally per the US constitution.
As you said yourself marriage has a natural evolution. It is currently evolving to allow two people to get married regardless of the sex of the two parties.
Please, let's spare the BS. You obviously hate the institution of traditional marriage and are going to go to any ludicrous length to present it as a repressive and/or primitive institution.
Big deal! That and a dollar will get you a draw beer (at least in the joints I used to hang out in...where men routinely went home drunk and "raped" their wives. Yeah, right...).
Are you for real? Are you a man or woman? Are you married? If so, have you ever been raped by your spouse. Do you think men and women married rape each other and it should involve the criminal justice system. Tell me (us) your experience with "spousal rape" being even remotely the norm..?
I bet it does. LOL Sounds like it to me too...if one accepts your dramatic presentation of it all. But what if perhaps, just perhaps, your definition of "property" is just dumb??
So? Flaw is that you presented it originally as if was a sibling relationship...and as if it was the norm. How many states do NOT allow first cousin marriages?
You are? Hell, I can hardly stop laughing. The definition -- in this country -- which is really all that matters -- is one between a man and woman. And any attempt to re-define it, has been soundly defeated at the voting booth (even in so-called "liberal" states).
How old are you? What kind of marriage are you in? What do you know about it, anyway? Do you have any children?
Earth to you: Free institutions are the way they are because they contain an instrinsic wisdom and natural evolution within them, that just because it/they cannot be always articulated, does not mean the same are not the result of many years of collective experience. And that they seem to endure...which is something in itself...
Speaking of BS, this quoted post is quite a load of it.
LOL You are totally out of your league. You are one of those who starts to believe their own press notices...and don't quite grasp that the rest of the country isn't in line with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose
On the contrary, I do not hate marriage. I am showing how it has changed multiple times in the US history
You must, because according to your profile, you are a "lesbian" now. But ok...
On the contrary, you not showing anything at all. It has never changed (as in between a man and woman, even if between several! LOL), except in you wannabee warped definition...
Quote:
I am a woman who has been married, and I'm still good friends with my ex.
I said that marital rape was not against the law at one time. There were laws passed that gave women the power to legally deal with that problem. If it wasn't a problem then they wouldn't have passed laws regarding it.
Once again, you are attempting to create, retroactivelly, a crime out of something that was non-existent. WHAT, pray tell, is "marital rape"???? Can you define it? I said always that violence to force sex is, and always has been, assault, battery, or both.
But you will not acknowlege that, because for the simple (and it IS simple) reason it doesnt fit your agenda.
Quote:
I think that if a man or woman DO rape their spouse then they should use the legal system. YOU are the one who seems to think that I mean every sex act in marriage is rape. I am talking about physically raping your spouse. They say no, and you still forcefully have sex with them THAT is rape.
IT has happened, it DOES happen, and it will continue to happen.
Uhhhhh...see above, ok? And every single point I have made as to that the relationship of marrigage implies consent...or else it is grounds for divorce. Else what use is the institution at all. NOTHING I have ever said sanctions violence to force sex. BUT.,..it is totally different from forcible rape.
Quote:
yes, but that has nothing to do with this discussion.
Yes, it does. You just want to avoid it and not address it.
Sorry, but I don't put a lot of stock on slanted studies like this. Again, you -- and the site -- are creating a crime that you want to create. Also, did your husband rape you? If so, and you are so adament about it, then you oughta be willing to share the experience and why and how and all...don't you think?
BTW -- hey, I have a married daughter, and if she ever told me her husband beat her up for sex, then he has had a bad day. BUT...it would be assault...not "rape". I am sorry, sincerely, that your marriage experience was your husband "raped" you. Curiosity...why did you marry the guy?
Quote:
On wives as property:
So he pretty much OWNED her. She could own no property. Had nothing that was legally considered hers. The husband also owned any children of the marriage.
It wasn't until 1839 in Mississippi that a woman could legally own property.
There was even a time in US history that a married woman could not have her own bank account without her husband signing for her.
Like I said earlier, I bet you would have given the sexist oppressors an earful then they brought over their wives as "property, huh? LOL
Seriously, this is naueating. This self-righteous breast beating (no pun intended) that comes with the luxury of applying standards of today with those that didn't exist a century ago. How very damn convenient. Hey? Would anybody have been any better off in the "old country"??? Did women have lots of rights back in Ireland or England or Germany? Did women have "rights" in the Native-American tribes?
Quote:
I said marriages within the family. Cousins are family. I can't help it if you are trying to put words there that aren't there.
Yep. Your are correct, Cousins are family. Can fourth cousins marry? How far back are you going to take this. At any rate, male and female first cousins...while I would agree is stretching things...is more natural than famale/female and/or male/male first cousins.
And as I have shown the definition of marriage has been changed multiple times in US history. YOU are the one saying it hasn't. I have proven what I said is true.
Quote:
As for voting. You don't get to vote on other peoples civil rights. Before you go there the USSC has repeatedly stated that marriage is a basic civil right.
Tell me the SCOTUS case so decided? What part of the Bill or Rights are denied gay people? Can they vote, peacefully assemble, keep and bear arms, have 5th ammedment rights...ect.
Quote:
My age is none of your concern. I am in a partnership as my state doesn't recognize marriages from other states. And yes, we do have children. I probably know more about marriage as a religious, and as a civil institution than you ever will.
Ya think? LOL But sure, your age is none of my concern on lots of levels. And in most cases I couldn't care less. However, it IS a concern in the sense those of your ilk seem to contantly accuse others of being oldfashioned bigots, or whatever. Don't presume that all of this hasn't been thought out beforehand. The reason I bring up "age" is that you just strike as one who presumes to lecture...but is too young to know half what you think you know. Nothing wrong with that -- other than a bit wet-behind-the ears -- and incapable of having a mature debate.
You have children? It HAD to have been from male and female parts, right? Is that true or not?
Quote:
As you said yourself marriage has a natural evolution. It is currently evolving to allow two people to get married regardless of the sex of the two parties.
I said it earlier, that is true. But never has it evolved into anything but a man and woman relationsip. Uhhh, and how do you figure it is "evolving" into a same-sex thingy? Every single time same sex marriage has been put up for vote? Even in liberal states? It has been voted down. What is so difficult to absorb about that? WHEN it becomes voted in as acceptable among the populace at large? Then I will definitely agree that the times are truly changing...!
Only if you quit being nasty and put those strawmen in the barn where they belong.
Nasty? How am I being nasty? I am sorry if you can't deal with opinions that go against yours. What strawmen are you talking about? There is no strawmen involved. What there IS, is an hysterical reaction to anyone who presents the other side of the question.
Think I give a flying donut about whether someone is "gay" or not? Big deal. I DO have a natural humorous reaction to those who seem to think that openly proclaiming it bestows some sort of courage medal on them.
So "you" (in a third person sense, not you personally) brag about being homosexual? Who cares? It is almost like everyone is supposed to fall over and play dead and give a damn because someone comes out of the closet...?
Does it ever occur that perhaps it wouldn't be such a thing if things just took their natural course in terms of societal mores...?
t
First off YOU know nothing about me or my marriage. Trying to say I was raped in any way shape or form is ridiculous.
WHY would I still be good friends with my ex if he had ever harmed me.
When a woman says no even if you are married to her and you forcefully have sex with her it is RAPE.
Marriage does not allow you to have her, nor her you, whenever you want. PERIOD. A marriage license does not grant consent to sex at any time.
The definition of marital rape legally is:
Quote:
Marital rape means any unwanted sexual acts by a spouse or ex-spouse that is committed without the other person's consent. Such illegal sexual activity are done using force, threat of force, intimidation, or when a person is unable to consent. The sexual acts include intercourse, anal or oral sex, forced sexual behavior with other individuals, and other sexual activities that are considered by the victim as degrading, humiliating, painful, and unwanted. It is also known as spousal rape.
Here is the CA penal code on spousal rape:
Quote:
‘spousal rape’: Cal Pen Code § 262. Spousal rape.
(a) Rape of a person who is the spouse of the perpetrator is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Where it is accomplished against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.
(2) Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known, by the accused.
(3) Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is known to the accused. As used in this paragraph, "unconscious of the nature of the act" means incapable of resisting because the victim meets one of the following conditions:
(A) Was unconscious or asleep.
(B) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant that the act occurred.
(C) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraud in fact.
(4) Where the act is accomplished against the victim's will by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim or any other person, and there is a reasonable possibility that the perpetrator will execute the threat. As used in this paragraph, "threatening to retaliate" means a threat to kidnap or falsely imprison, or to inflict extreme pain, serious bodily injury, or death.
(5) Where the act is accomplished against the victim's will by threatening to use the authority of a public official to incarcerate, arrest, or deport the victim or another, and the victim has a reasonable belief that the perpetrator is a public official. As used in this paragraph, "public official" means a person employed by a governmental agency who has the authority, as part of that position, to incarcerate, arrest, or deport another. The perpetrator does not actually have to be a public official.
There was obviously a problem for a law against it to be passed. You can say it isn't but in the eyes of the law of every state it is rape.
Quote:
Tell me the SCOTUS case so decided? What part of the Bill or Rights are denied gay people? Can they vote, peacefully assemble, keep and bear arms, have 5th ammedment rights...ect.
Loving V Virginia Zablocki v. Redhail Turner v. Safley
There are 3 to start you off.
The 14th amendment sets up equal protections under the law.
Quote:
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
By denying me the right to marry the person of my choice, I am being denied equal protections, and privileges that are granted by the government to married couples.
Quote:
Ya think? LOL But sure, your age is none of my concern on lots of levels. And in most cases I couldn't care less. However, it IS a concern in the sense those of your ilk seem to contantly accuse others of being oldfashioned bigots, or whatever. Don't presume that all of this hasn't been thought out beforehand. The reason I bring up "age" is that you just strike as one who presumes to lecture...but is too young to know half what you think you know. Nothing wrong with that -- other than a bit wet-behind-the ears -- and incapable of having a mature debate.
I am posting verifiable facts, how is that immature?
YOU are the one trying to twist my words, and calling my ex a rapist. THAT is childish, and immature.
Have you ever heard of IVF. Many people use modern medicine to have children. Even hetero couples.
Quote:
I said it, that is true. But never has it evolved into anything but a man and woman relationsip. Uhhh, and how do you figure it is "evolving" into a same-sex thingy? Every single time same sex marriage has been put up for vote? Even in liberal state? It has been voted down. What is so difficult to absorb about that. WHEN it becomes voted in as acceptable among the populace at large? Then I will definitely agree that the times are truly changing...!
Interracial marriage was made legal through the Supreme court. It has only recently been approved by the majority.
Sorry, but that is how the law regarding the denial of civil rights works.
As for it evolving to include same sex couples. There are already 6 states where it is legal. Those couples are just as married as a hetero couple.
Nasty? How am I being nasty? I am sorry if you can't deal with opinions that go against yours. What strawmen are you talking about? There is no strawmen involved. What there IS, is an hysterical reaction to anyone who presents the other side of the question.
Think I give a flying donut about whether someone is "gay" or not? Big deal. I DO have a natural humorous reaction to those who seem to think that openly proclaiming it bestows some sort of courage medal on them.
So "you" (in a third person sense, not you personally) brag about being homosexual? Who cares? It is almost like everyone is supposed to fall over and play dead and give a damn...
Look, I dont have time, nor the inclination to write an epistle the size of War And Peace, but heres the short version.
Calliig JJ out on her age?
Really?
Inquiring as to the state of her marriage?
More really....
Theres 2 strawmen right there.
So unnecessary, and brings nothing to the debate at all.
Look, I dont have time, nor the inclination to write an epistle the size of War And Peace, but heres the short version.
I am sure you think this is a neat deflection...but what does War and Peace have to do with it? Hell, I don't have the time nor inclination to write an espistle on "Gone With the Wind". Can we compare?
Quote:
Calliig JJ out on her age?
It is a legitimate question. Why wouldn't it be? If one thinks and/or regards by default age with being behind the times? Then equally applicable to ask the age of the person judging...
Quote:
Really?
Inquiring as to the state of her marriage?
Not withstanding I don't care a lick about her "marriage"....but OF COURSE it matter in the context! Hells Bells. If someone places the institution of marriage between a man and woman as being just another nothing, then I have every right in the world to question to basis of such a preposterous perversion of terms.
Quote:
More really....
Theres 2 strawmen right there.
So unnecessary, and brings nothing to the debate at all.
What strawman...much less two of them...?
Sweetie? If there was anything, really, to debate/discuss? Then it would be different. But there really isn't.
I am sure you think this is a neat deflection...but what does War and Peace have to do with it? Hell, I don't have the time nor inclination to write an espistle on "Gone With the Wind". Can we compare?
It is a legitimate question. Why wouldn't it be? If one thinks and/or regards by default age with being behind the times? Then equally applicable to ask the age of the person judging...
Not withstanding I don't care a lick about her "marriage"....but OF COURSE it matter in the context! Hells Bells. If someone places the institution of marriage between a man and woman as being just another nothing, then I have every right in the world to question to basis of such a preposterous perversion of terms.
What strawman...much less two of them...?
Sweetie? If there was anything, really, to debate/discuss? Then it would be different. But there really isn't.
Let's go...
First, I never said, or even implied that you or anyone else were behind the times. You are the one who threw that one out there.
Second, I never said marriage was worth nothing. If that is what I thought, why would I be fighting for the right to get married?
Now. I am finished with you unless you have anything to actually add to the debate, or can offer anything to rebut the facts that I have already provided. Nuh uh is NOT a rebuttal.
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.
That and a dollar will get you a draw beer (at least in the joints I used to hang out in...where men routinely went home drunk and "raped" their wives). 
