1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

DOJ: Children Do Not Need OR Have Rights To Mothers

Discussion in 'Other Policies' started by Cruella, Mar 4, 2013.

  1. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,942
    Likes Received:
    1,361
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    im sorry your graphic fel flat on its irrelevant tangent.

    ok im not sorry at all.
     
  2. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    I am sorry your to slow to follow simple concepts...like that Marriage has always changed.
    But I am not shocked...
     
  3. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,942
    Likes Received:
    1,361
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    changed ? nope. always opposite sex the world around even before man made guidelines were thought of.

    thats the simple truth no matter how badly you want to deny it.
     
  4. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    Your example proved that some details of unions between man and woman have changed. It has failed to prove that the basics of marriage have changed. Some of the examples in your illustration are not accepted as best today and what that proves is that some of the forms of marriage even though they are still between man and woman are NOT good. How much worse are changes to the more basic foundation of marriage?

    That being said I think that we can always find something good in any imagined form of marriage and there are always examples of odd forms that seem to work fine. That does not mean that society at large should endorse these forms. As a more libertarian leaning person I don't think society needs to endorse any form of marraige anyway. We need to protect children. So allow any form of marriage that any people want without state interference. If a group of people want to get married and their church is going to endorse it then I just dont care. If they need a license then the state can define what is best. I could see how a group of people might need a license because it would be near impossible to tell which of the five men and five woman were the parents of which children for determining paternity and inheritance. when it comes to two men getting married the state need not get involved because they will not be creating any children - no license needed.
     
  5. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,942
    Likes Received:
    1,361
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    Poc was belittling arranged marriages as is so popular to do. I usedto as well until a wonderfull young Indian bride to be schooled me on her coming arranged marriage. All goes to show what you assume to be trueaint necessarily so.
     
  6. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    If she is happy so be it, the point is the definition of mattiage has often changed, and means different things to different religions and cultures....But you pretend only yours matters and only your narrow definition is true.
     
  7. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,942
    Likes Received:
    1,361
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    man, woman. no change. across ages, across cultures its always the same and for obvious reasons.

    despite what you might want to think.
     
  8. Cruella

    Cruella Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    4,312
    Likes Received:
    727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Protect children, let any group get married without interference and it's okay if the church endorses it?

    I see comparing apples to oranges there. What does protect the children mean to you? If anyone really cared about protecting children, maybe they are the ones who should decide what they want to have in a family.

    I suspect most children would want a mother and a father together in a secure and loving home. Not these crazy match-ups and mis-matches that produce messed up kids.
     
    dogtowner likes this.
  9. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    I only tbought pocket was telling us that the meaning of marriage had changed - an argument that failed.

    I too used to know an (East) Indian couple that had an arranged marriage and I learned a lot from them about some valuable perspectives on marriage. I also had a class in community college on marriage which said that 20% of American marriages are only for the sake of the money. The idea that everyone marries only out of love and only because they choose it is false. IMO the origin of the marriage is less important than what the couple makes of it. That being said I choose my bride based on love and am grateful to have had that opportunity. We still had struggles and needed to make our marriage what it is today.
     
  10. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    Solomon was a very wise man and yet had marriages that were quite different from our own. His were also endorsed by God. He was rich and provided for his children very well. Solomon was the father, each child had a mother and the bond between parents was secure. As far as the state was concerned paternity was known so inheritance and deciding who should care for the kids was well defined. Love may not ALWAYS have been a part of his marriages but it was in at least some of them.
     
  11. Cruella

    Cruella Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    4,312
    Likes Received:
    727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While playing around with genealogy, I have read hundreds of census records going back to the 1800's. One thing I noticed was the frequency of missing parents. You can find a family ten years later with a different mother (usually) or father.

    It seemed necessary for men and women with young children to remarry for obvious reasons. I found my own ggg-grandfather who was one of 7 kids with his mom and a step-father when he was 8. The step father had two children from a different marriage and they had one child together.
     
Loading...

Share This Page