A defense of marriage

Page 5 of 10 [ 146 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

SaveFerris
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Sep 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,762
Location: UK

17 May 2019, 8:22 am

hurtloam wrote:

I really think a good Christian man would do housework.

All men should do housework in an equal partnerships unless circumstances prevent this. ( I've been Christened but I'm not religious )

_________________
R Tape loading error, 0:1

Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury. Raise the double standard

kdm1984
Velociraptor

Joined: 31 May 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: SW MO, USA

17 May 2019, 8:36 am

magz wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

I posted this on another autism forum, and it also got moved to the religion sub-forum in time. Good discussion, but ultimately the main point has gotten side-tracked. Just want to remind everyone that as much as my own belief system informs my defense of marriage here, the defense of marriage was the primary topic, and not religion. Again, my spouse is not theistic, and he nonetheless supports marriage for the right reasons as well. We have a good marriage. A couple of atheists on the other autism forum also defended marriage. I understand not everyone is designed to be married, and the Apostle Paul esteemed singleness as the highest calling (for those who can accept it). Still, in the day and age where people would want to tear down this institution, despite the benefits offered across numerous cultures and religions, I've found it very beneficial for me and mine, hence a defense of it.

That is all.

But defense against what?

Against the kinds of people who tear it down and compare it to the likes of cigarette smoking, as someone did earlier in this very thread.

_________________
36 yr old female; dx age 29. Level 2 Aspie.

kdm1984
Velociraptor

Joined: 31 May 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: SW MO, USA

17 May 2019, 8:38 am

hurtloam wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

You brought religion into it though. It was the basis of your argument.

Yes, I brought religion to it, but again, the primary purpose is defending marriage. You do realize there can be sub-points to an argument, yes? I really don't know how many times I need to repeat this -- it's even in my original post -- but once again:

Just want to remind everyone that as much as my own belief system informs my defense of marriage here, the defense of marriage was the primary topic, and not religion.

How much more clear can this be?

Also, everyone sure likes to ignore the fact that my husband is non-theistic. Sure is an inconvenience for some here trying to twist my argument, isn't it? Ignoring it doesn't cause the fact to cease to exist.

_________________
36 yr old female; dx age 29. Level 2 Aspie.

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,697
Location: Hell

17 May 2019, 8:45 am

kdm1984 wrote:

magz wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

But defense against what?

Against the kinds of people who tear it down and compare it to the likes of cigarette smoking, as someone did earlier in this very thread.

You entirely missed the point of Fnord’s comment which he has since very clearly clarified.

_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

17 May 2019, 8:46 am

kdm1984 wrote:

Against the kinds of people who tear it down and compare it to the likes of cigarette smoking, as someone did earlier in this very thread.

And how does comparing marriage to cigarette smoking threaten it?

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

kdm1984
Velociraptor

Joined: 31 May 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: SW MO, USA

17 May 2019, 8:48 am

I've come to think there is a score of jealousy here that people of two opposing religious viewpoints can have a happy marriage, hence the bad faith arguments.

Nonetheless, the purpose of this thread stands. There is hope for people in marriage, that it can be good, even in spite of religious differences. Marriage has been defended, the thread has served its purpose, even amid people who would seek to tear down either the institution, tear down one marriage partner's religion, or else ignore the lack of religion of the other marriage partner because it weakens their anti-religion argument.

_________________
36 yr old female; dx age 29. Level 2 Aspie.

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,697
Location: Hell

17 May 2019, 8:49 am

kdm1984 wrote:

hurtloam wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

You brought religion into it though. It was the basis of your argument.

If you didn’t want us talking about the religious aspects of it, why did you mention it in your original post?

No one needs to defend marriage. People will continue to marry or not marry depending on their own preferences and tastes.

It’s certainly not something that one should take lightly, though (which was what Fnord was arguing).

_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess

BTDT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,123

17 May 2019, 8:49 am

Marriage does provide for an orderly transfer of assets if a partner passes. It can and often is a real mess when people are living together and one passes, as the surviving partner has no rights unless there is a document like a will.

kdm1984
Velociraptor

Joined: 31 May 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: SW MO, USA

17 May 2019, 8:49 am

magz wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

Against the kinds of people who tear it down and compare it to the likes of cigarette smoking, as someone did earlier in this very thread.

And how does comparing marriage to cigarette smoking threaten it?

You're clearly just trolling here now. No longer replying to such bad faith arguments.

_________________
36 yr old female; dx age 29. Level 2 Aspie.

kdm1984
Velociraptor

Joined: 31 May 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: SW MO, USA

17 May 2019, 8:51 am

Twilightprincess seems to forget that I put her on ignore, which I mentioned so clearly on this thread.

Religion is fair to discuss, but it isn't the primary purpose of this thread.

So tired of being a broken record.

Enjoy your envy.

_________________
36 yr old female; dx age 29. Level 2 Aspie.

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,697
Location: Hell

17 May 2019, 8:51 am

BTDT wrote:

Very valid point! Probably the most valid argument for marriage that I’ve seen so far in this thread.

_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,697
Location: Hell

17 May 2019, 8:54 am

kdm1984 wrote:

I don’t believe that being on ignore means that I can’t post on a thread.

I’m not sure why I would be envious of a submissive marriage.

This is all extremely baffling. I hope someone can enlighten me.

_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess

BlueIris24
Raven
Raven

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 113

17 May 2019, 8:54 am

kdm1984 wrote:

You seem defensive and like you have a chip on your shoulder. If you don't want to be challenged on your beliefs, then perhaps don't post?

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

17 May 2019, 8:56 am

Magz might be many things----but she is definitely not a troll.

Marriage is a good thing---when the partners are compatible. And when there's love and respect between the partners.

When they are not compatible, and they "drift apart" from each other, then marriage can seem like you're in a "ball and chain." And relationships sour because of the legal aspects.

Being the submissive party in a marriage is deleterious, especially, to the one who submits (unless the submissive party is "turned on" by it).

I think KDM is a fine person. And I think Twilightprincess a fine person. Both are quite intelligent people. People disagree----even best friends disagree.

BlueIris24
Raven
Raven

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 113

17 May 2019, 8:57 am

AngelRho wrote:

BlueIris24 wrote:

Well, you're saying society is terrible because it doesn't follow the Bible 100% literally.

Verses like that are WHY the Bible leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and why religion needs to be separate from government.

I'll explain it this way: I got into this same discussion over in PPR once and got "official warnings" from mods, even though all I did was point out exactly what the Bible had to say on the topic. That was the first time I'd been exposed to protected class rhetoric, something I now recognize as being victim class rhetoric, which is also a form of the kind of negativity I generally steer clear of. I learned quickly how fair and equal WP rules really are. While I do detect a hint of bias on here in favor of victimhood, I know firsthand that mods really do look into both sides. Once I started reporting posts attacking me by trying to lure me into taboo subjects, things radically changed for the better. I understand that identifying as you do that you take issue with what the Bible says. However, it's bad form to call someone out on a sincerely held belief if they are unable to defend their position without getting banned. Victim class persons can say what they want and attack who they want, yet someone who identifies, say, conservative evangelical Christian is simply supposed either take it, cave, or get banned. If it were YOUR views that were in question, you wouldn't easily tolerate it, either. So how do we have a meaningful discussion without politicizing everything? Famous Christians in the media seem to have a difficult time with this.

You're right. There's no point in discussing this.

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

17 May 2019, 8:58 am

kdm1984 wrote:

magz wrote:

kdm1984 wrote:

Against the kinds of people who tear it down and compare it to the likes of cigarette smoking, as someone did earlier in this very thread.

And how does comparing marriage to cigarette smoking threaten it?

You're clearly just trolling here now. No longer replying to such bad faith arguments.

Nope, I just don't see the purpose of this thread at all. No need to defend something that is not threatened. Fnord does not threaten my marriage. Or marriage of my parents. Or any marriage I know of. He wouldn't even if his remarks were much more inappropriate.
So why defend?

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

Page 5 of 10 [ 146 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10 Next

Jump to:

A defense of marriage Post Reply New Topic

A defense of marriage