View Poll Results: Your views on Marriage (foreigners select elsewhere answers only please)
I live in USA: Heterosexual Marriage Only 13 7.22%
I live in USA: Homosexual Civil Unions Only 9 5.00%
I live in USA: Full Homosexual Marriage Rights 45 25.00%
I live in USA: #3 + Further Extend Rights to Polygamy 17 9.44%
I live in USA: #1 only and extending rights to Polygamy 0 0%
I live in USA: Extend Marriage to Bannanas 4 2.22%
Elsewhere: Heterosexual Marriage Only 16 8.89%
Elsewhere: Homosexual Civil Unions Only 11 6.11%
Elsewhere: Full Homosexual Marriage Rights 46 25.56%
Elsewhere: #9 + Further Extend Rights to Polygamy 13 7.22%
Elsewhere: #7 only and extending rights to Polygamy 1 0.56%
Elsewhere: Extend Marriage to Bannanas 5 2.78%
Voters: 180. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools
Old March 3, 2004, 16:06   #331
Ming
lifer
Civilization II MultiplayerCivilization III MultiplayerPolyCast TeamCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of Fame
Retired
 
Ming's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Mingapulco - CST
Posts: 30,317
Back to your old games again I see Thorn.... see ya.
__________________
Keep on Civin'
Civ V Civilization V Civ5 CivV Civilization 5 Civ 5 - Do your part!
Ming is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 16:12   #332
Rogan Josh
Prince
 
Local Time: 19:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally posted by Kontiki
Ahh, but here's where your arguement starts to fall apart:

You and your church and not the representative voice for all Christians.

There are right now, in the US and Canada (maybe Europe too, I don't know), Christian churches that are perfectly willing to perform gay marriages. If you pass a law banning "marriages" for homosexuals, then aren't you still impinging on religious freedom?
So where is the problem? Any religion should be able to practice whatever it wants (as long as it doesn't impinge on the rights of others). These churches are not my church and I am in no way connected to them.

Gay people can declare themselves to form an exclusively gay church if they like, and conduct 'marriage' ceremonies dressed in black leather and tutus. I don't care. The point is that I don't have to recognise it as a 'marriage'.
Rogan Josh is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:05   #333
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
My god the quality of this debate is appalling!!!!

Both in general and on this, and other debates on this subject, I have to say that by far the strongest case is being made by the pro-gay marriage side. The anti side relies on either religion or a subjective definition of marriage, by enlarge, or some flawwed anecdotal evidence against homosexuality in general. Needless to say, it holds about as much water as a sieve.
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:44   #334
Ben Kenobi
Civilization II Democracy GameCivilization II Succession GamesCivilization II Multiplayer
Emperor
 
Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 18,269
Quote:
There needs to be official sanctioning of Christianity from the government.
Eh?

Religious freedoms are protected under the American constitution. I don't see any of my argument applying specifically to Christian clergy. They should also protect the Muslims, Sikhs; anyone who does not want to recognise these relationships ought to be protected.

Right now, I anticipate a challenge between the Section 3 and Section 15 parts of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, while not underway, will soon be.
__________________
Scouse Git (2) LaFayette and Adam Smith you will be missed
"All my own perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded upon Our Lady." - JRR Tolkein
Get busy living or get busy dying.
Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:45   #335
MrFun
Emperor
 
MrFun's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8,595
I was just fooling around, since I can't take you seriously in these threads, Bennie.
__________________
STFU and then GTFO!
MrFun is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:46   #336
SpencerH
Civilization III PBEMCivilization III MultiplayerBtS Tri-League
Emperor
 
SpencerH's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back in BAMA full time.
Posts: 4,502
Quote:
Originally posted by Ming
Back to your old games again I see Thorn.... see ya.
It wasnt that bad.
__________________
We need seperate human-only games for MP/PBEM that dont include the over-simplifications required to have a good AI
If any man be thirsty, let him come unto me and drink. Vampire 7:37
Just one old soldiers opinion. E Tenebris Lux. Pax quaeritur bello.
SpencerH is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:46   #337
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
I gotta side with MrFun on that one. Ben, may I suggest reading up on the difference between formal and informal fallacies, and the problems of throwing an inducted argument against a deducted argument?
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:49   #338
Ben Kenobi
Civilization II Democracy GameCivilization II Succession GamesCivilization II Multiplayer
Emperor
 
Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 18,269
Whaleboy:

Really. I suppose you saying so, makes it true, eh?
__________________
Scouse Git (2) LaFayette and Adam Smith you will be missed
"All my own perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded upon Our Lady." - JRR Tolkein
Get busy living or get busy dying.
Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:51   #339
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Nope, it makes it true according to my opinion which is the best we can offer. Unlike some, I don't pretend that my opinions have necessary sway over the objective!

Nonetheless, if you like being taken seriously by others, I suggest you revise your tactics here. I'm more than willing to help via PM if needed.
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:52   #340
Ben Kenobi
Civilization II Democracy GameCivilization II Succession GamesCivilization II Multiplayer
Emperor
 
Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 18,269
Quote:
Ben, may I suggest reading up on the difference between formal and informal fallacies, and the problems of throwing an inducted argument against a deducted argument?
Brave words for one without an argument.

Go ahead. Show me why my claims are false, that marriage between one man and one woman provides substantial benefits to society.
__________________
Scouse Git (2) LaFayette and Adam Smith you will be missed
"All my own perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded upon Our Lady." - JRR Tolkein
Get busy living or get busy dying.
Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:55   #341
Ben Kenobi
Civilization II Democracy GameCivilization II Succession GamesCivilization II Multiplayer
Emperor
 
Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 18,269
Quote:
Unlike some, I don't pretend that my opinions have necessary sway over the objective!
If this is your sort of 'advice' I can frankly do without.

What point is there arguing, unless one makes some kind of case for objective morality? The soup of subjectivism cannot harness anything concrete.
__________________
Scouse Git (2) LaFayette and Adam Smith you will be missed
"All my own perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded upon Our Lady." - JRR Tolkein
Get busy living or get busy dying.
Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 17:57   #342
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:24
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Whaleboy:

Really. I suppose you saying so, makes it true, eh?
As opposed, to say, Fred Phelps saying something makes that 'true'.
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:12   #343
SpencerH
Civilization III PBEMCivilization III MultiplayerBtS Tri-League
Emperor
 
SpencerH's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back in BAMA full time.
Posts: 4,502
Sorry to jump in but I've gotta go pump some iron.

We dont need to disprove prove that "marriage between one man and one woman provides substantial benefits to society". I accept that to be true. You need to prove that a man and women are required for a marriage.

Rogans point is separate from that and to some degree I agree with him.
__________________
We need seperate human-only games for MP/PBEM that dont include the over-simplifications required to have a good AI
If any man be thirsty, let him come unto me and drink. Vampire 7:37
Just one old soldiers opinion. E Tenebris Lux. Pax quaeritur bello.
SpencerH is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:14   #344
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
that marriage between one man and one woman provides substantial benefits to society.
Benefits: Children brought up in stable household which we can all agree are beneficial.

Married and non-married relationships are capable of bringing up children to an equal degree, the only variable is stability (and consequentially the effects of that on upbringing).

Non-marrieds aren't discernably less stable than marrieds now, what with the divorce rate and women feeling that they no longer have to be trapped in marriage (which was after all, a form of slavery).

There is no evidence that isn't easily refuted (and I haven't yet seen statistics so perhaps you can provide?) that shows categorically that gay people bring up disadvantaged children. We have speculative, anecdotal evidence, particularly from homophobics, but that doesn't seem to be a problem. One concern of course to the welfare of the child is the reaction of homophobic elements in society to them but that is no reason to ban gay marriage, just as the prospect of racism is no reason to ban immigration. In term of benefits to society however, one could argue it is creating a benefit by making a lot of people very happy, and finally showing that love is something that transcends, rather than sticks between definition. We won't get over homophobia and a very old stigma attached to gay people when heterosexuals are given more basic rights (the right to marry) than gay people.

Therefore, marriage holds little or no advantage in bringing up children in society. Any other benefits that require refutation.

My argument is simple. I am pro gay marriage because there is no logical barrier to it (and indeed none in my mind but since it would benefit me, one can expect that ). Attempts to define marriage as man and woman generally fall foul of the problem of subjectivity because there are competiting definitions. Attempts to counter that by referencing the "institution of marriage" back in history produces a conclusion that since marriage was initially a form of slavery, changes to that initial "sacred codex" are thus not marriage (according to that), we so are reduced to saying that marriage itself is merely a contract between individuals, its meaning is entirely relative to the beholder. This is of course providing that the contract does not breach the law, which, since homosexuality is a legal pursuit, is not the case. Let us also consider that this is something of a wholesale argument. As far as the state is concerned, marriage is merely a contract anyway, so the same argument applies. It was always a fallacy of statue to enshrine a particular manner of contract in the law, undoubtably stemming from the link between Church and state, now generally considered a bad idea to a great degree.

What however, is a necessary conclusion of my argument, is that while gay marriage (and also my argument applies well both consequentially and intentionally to polygamy too) should be legalised by the state, any representatives of an individual doctrine (e.g. Christianity) have the right to refuse to wed certain couples. That is fine, as long as where they are legally required to recognise marrieds as such, they do so.

A more condensed libertarian argument is this: People want gay marriage and it is not impeding anyone else. In an open society, it is a fallacy to impose ones subjective moral views upon another, through either individual action or the state. Gay marriage therefore, which is not impeding others (unless you can show me how of course ), is a subjective moral view that they are entitled to (they are not imposing it on others unless they are forcing straight men to marry each other), just as traditional marriage, should be legal.

Quad Erat Demonstrandum?

EDIT: My advice would be the conduct of a debate, rather than merely basic subjectivism.
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:

Last edited by Whaleboy; March 3, 2004 at 18:31.
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:19   #345
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
If this is your sort of 'advice' I can frankly do without.

What point is there arguing, unless one makes some kind of case for objective morality? The soup of subjectivism cannot harness anything concrete.
Read Hume. .

It most certainly can harness something concrete: Liberalism and libertarianism. My own subjective points of view differs from yours, but I do not attempt to force that into the objective! Are you suggesting that in order to debate, we have to make fallacies of our points? If so I do not concur.

If you are going into a debate with a mind to establish a logical, qualitative truth, or show your view to be necessarily "correct" over others, then you are barking up the wrong tree. 3000 years of philosophy have failed to do that, and I don't think you are going to achieve tonight what millenia of cogitations has failed to do. Debates show by practical logical strength what is best in a particular situation, where the pro-gay marriage side very much has the upper hand (and arm), as a competition to see who can wield the stronger logic (and again) or a simple artistic comparison between views.

This of course entails respect for your opponents points of view, which is of course no preclusion to picking holes in them .

Quote:
Originally posted by SpencerH
Sorry to jump in but I've gotta go pump some iron.

We dont need to disprove prove that "marriage between one man and one woman provides substantial benefits to society". I accept that to be true. You need to prove that a man and women are required for a marriage.

Rogans point is separate from that and to some degree I agree with him.
A good point, I merely refuted his point directly, you have wholly undermined it .

His is a consequential argument, which has problems of its own and generally weaker against a direct intentional argument (one on one) but I'm not about to get into a debate on the merits and demerits of consequentialism and utilitarianism here. According to the main forms of utilitarianism, including act utilitarianism, gay marriage is a good idea anyway! This of course varies per society, I am dealing with this from a British POV, BK is American I assume where while that argument still holds true, it does so with less chutzpah. No matter, plenty more arrows in this quiver...

...that's not a come-on
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:22   #346
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by Whaleboy


Married and non-married relationships are capable of bringing up children to an equal degree, the only variable is stability (and consequentially the effects of that on upbringing).
Your entire argument depends upon this statement. The problem with your statement is that it flies in the face of millenia of experience.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:23   #347
chequita guevara
ACDG The Human HiveDiplomacyApolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
chequita guevara's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Fort LOLderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Posts: 9,091
Not really.
__________________
Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...
chequita guevara is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:29   #348
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
Your entire argument depends upon this statement. The problem with your statement is that it flies in the face of millenia of experience.
No, my argument depends on several on the consequential side, and many more on the intentional side. Furthermore, it allows for the fact that marriage and non-marriage in terms of benefit to society is an increasingly academic distinction, as marriage itself becomes largely irrelevant to social stability, unless people complain (and rightly so) because their basic rights are denied to them.
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:31   #349
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
I have posted the following thought in another thread, but I will repeat it here.

Relationships are entirely a private matter. The US Supreme Court has by decision given private relationships constitutional protection. People can live together in any manner they choose and the state cannot interfere.

California law already recognizes rights of people who simply live together for a substantial time. These are equivalent to marriages under that law and accord similar rights on "divorce" or death. In other words, California law already recognizes full "marital" rights for people just living together without marriage.

The question then becomes, why do we have marriage licenses and civil marriages at all? They make no sense since people can simply live together and gain full rights and obligations.

Since the state cannot interfer in private relationships and sex, there should be no rules against gay relationships, incest or polygamy. These are private matters that beyond the reach of the state.

On the issue of children, though, I think we could and should legislate in favor of traditional single-man, single-woman relationships as the preferred household model for raising them.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:34   #350
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
Since the state cannot interfer in private relationships and sex, there should be no rules against gay relationships, incest or polygamy. These are private matters that beyond the reach of the state.
Looking good so far

Quote:
On the issue of children, though, I think we could and should legislate in favor of traditional single-man, single-woman relationships as the preferred household model for raising them.
I think each situation should be judged on a case-by-case basis, rather than having some inflexible principled systems whereby perfectly good and capable households are discriminated against because of some statistical proposition (for which I need more evidence anyway to even begin to use as part of an intentionally potent argument).
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:37   #351
Spiffor
Civilization III Democracy GamePtWDG LegolandApolytoners Hall of Fame
 
Spiffor's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: jihadding against Danish Feta
Posts: 6,182
Quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Your entire argument depends upon this statement. The problem with your statement is that it flies in the face of millenia of experience.


Care to back this assertion?
__________________
"I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
"I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
"I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- Dis
Spiffor is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:39   #352
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor



Care to back this assertion?
Proposition:

Married couples stay together longer than unmarried couples.

Refute this by evidence if you can. The statement is true.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:40   #353
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:24
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor



Care to back this assertion?
I think he's referring to Ug and Gragla, the well known Stone Age couple who started monogamy, somewhere in the Neolithic Rift Valley.

I think Richard Leakey may have found their wedding invitations inscribed on a baboon shoulder.
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:41   #354
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by Whaleboy


No, my argument depends on several on the consequential side, and many more on the intentional side. Furthermore, it allows for the fact that marriage and non-marriage in terms of benefit to society is an increasingly academic distinction, as marriage itself becomes largely irrelevant to social stability, unless people complain (and rightly so) because their basic rights are denied to them.
Your point was that stability of a couple was critical to childern. I agree.

However, my point is that married couple have historically been more stable.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:43   #355
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
Proposition:

Married couples stay together longer than unmarried couples.

Refute this by evidence if you can. The statement is true.
The problem there is that unmarrieds includes non serious relationships, or relationships between one or more people under that age of ~25 which tend imo to be more unstable and have less longevity than other relationships. Consider a hypothetical scenario of two identical couples, one married one not, the marriage would be irrelevant to them lasting, and rightly so because the reasons why in times past they would have lasted was the womans subservitude.

Two childbearing couples that have "settled down", one married, one not, it is reasonable to say that each has an equal chance of outlasting the other.

Quote:
Your point was that stability of a couple was critical to childern. I agree.

However, my point is that married couple have historically been more stable.
See above.

As added weight to my argument, gay people the coolest people on Earth
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:44   #356
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom


I think he's referring to Ug and Gragla, the well known Stone Age couple who started monogamy, somewhere in the Neolithic Rift Valley.

I think Richard Leakey may have found their wedding invitations inscribed on a baboon shoulder.
No Molly, the formalities of marriage, support from the families and society, etc., have given marriages a lot more stability than just living together.

BTW, all us righties cannot think. We simply drag our knuckles and grunt like the troglydite we are.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:47   #357
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
Quote:
No Molly, the formalities of marriage, support from the families and society, etc., have given marriages a lot more stability than just living together.
No offence intended, but I have to laugh

Quote:
BTW, all us righties cannot think. We simply drag our knuckles and grunt like the troglydite we are.
You got that off my Flame Warriors thread didn't you?
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:47   #358
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:24
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by Ned


Proposition:

Married couples stay together longer than unmarried couples.

Refute this by evidence if you can. The statement is true.
My partner and I have been together for twenty years come November.

That's longer than the first marriages of his sister and his cousin put together.

We aren't married, we don't have children (adopted or otherwise) and we're both gay men.

Do I win?
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:48   #359
Proteus_MST
King
 
Proteus_MST's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Yuggoth
Posts: 1,987
Quote:
Originally posted by Ned

Your point was that stability of a couple was critical to childern. I agree.

However, my point is that married couple have historically been more stable.
Hm,
the Problem is of course,
that you always have to compare that within the Society where they lived.

For example you couldnīt compare Data gathered from the second half of the 20th century with Data from the 19th century, as with the Change in Society also the rate of Divorces and breakups has climbed.
Do you have any Statistics comparing the Stability of Relationships with or without marriage in several time periods?
__________________
Applications programming is a race between software engineers, who strive to produce idiot-proof programs, and the Universe which strives to produce bigger idiots. - software engineers' saying
So far, the Universe is winning.
- applications programmers' saying
Proteus_MST is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 18:48   #360
Whaleboy
NationStatesAlpha Centauri Democracy GameACDG The Cybernetic ConsciousnessMac
Prince
 
Whaleboy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:24
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Posts: 853
MB: You win

An early congratulations for November!!! :dance

You've been together longer than I've been alive!!

Anyways, I've made my point, I'm off to bed!
__________________
"I work in IT so I'd be buggered without a computer" - Words of wisdom from Provost Harrison
"You can be wrong AND jewish" - Wiglaf :love:
Whaleboy is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:24.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright Đ The Apolyton Team