Religions > Atheism > Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote.
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Randy Jabsco" |
| Date: |
12 Dec 2003 03:02:24 PM |
| Object: |
Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
Hey, I thought you faggots said that people were "accepting" you now.
What's this all about? I thought you faggots said that "ignorance to old
beliefs are making way". Come on faggots, explain this... I don't
understand. If people love faggots so much, why would over two-thirds vote
otherwise? Why is there currently 38 states with anti-gay marriage laws,
all properly voted for by the public? I am having troubles understanding
why the only way faggots can appear to be accepted is by finding a
sympathetic judge to scratch out laws for them. Can't you get the
"accepting" public to vote for them for you? Why isn't it that the faggots
aren't putting these issues on the ballets rather than taking it to
sympathetic judges and congress men?
===
Ohio House passes anti-gay marriage bill
COLUMBUS -- Gay marriage would be banned and state employees could not
obtain health insurance and other benefits for unmarried partners under a
bill passed by the Ohio House on Wednesday.
The measure, approved by a 73-23 vote, would recognize marriage as a union
"between one man and one woman" and declare that extending benefits for
unmarried partners to state employees, whether of the same or opposite sex,
is against state policy.
Supporters of the measure point toward the possibility of other states
approving homosexual unions as the impetus for Ohio to set its own standards
for marriage.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last month declared that state's
gay marriage ban unconstitutional and ordered lawmakers to extend the legal
benefits of marriage to domestic partners.
But opponents called the bill discrimination.
House minority leader Rep. Chris Redfern, D-Catawba Island, said committee
hearings on the bill were filled with "hate filled language and bigoted
comments" about homosexuals.
"I cannot allow myself to be aligned with that," he said. "I have respect
for my fellow members ... but I don't want them to be the morality police."
Redfern added that considering society's 50-percent divorce rate, it's hard
to argue that the issue is about upholding the sanctity of marriage.
.
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 10:48:15 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:10:59 GMT, Klein Bottle <none> posted in
alt.atheism:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:o08ltvo7rimu8u73mf9qqs78648vi4kmge@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> posted
in alt.atheism:
Someone with mixed up DNA probably can't produce children so a marriage
would not be consummated with anyone.
Marriage is not legally about reproduction. If it were, it would be
voided as soon as a couple was too old to reproduce, and sterile
people wouldn't be allowed to marry.
Actually, that's where you are wrong. Marriage has long been used as a way
to legitimize reproduction.
Reproduction doesn't need to be "legitimized". It's been going on for
more than 3 billion years with no "legitimization".
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
PLENTY of people get married for reasons other than reproduction. And
have been since marriage was invented.
Who's yer daddy, boy?!
A man whose shoe soles you'll never be qualified to lick.
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jefferson Brady" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 06:09:05 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:10:59 GMT, Klein Bottle <none> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:o08ltvo7rimu8u73mf9qqs78648vi4kmge@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> posted
in alt.atheism:
Someone with mixed up DNA probably can't produce children so a marriage
would not be consummated with anyone.
Marriage is not legally about reproduction. If it were, it would be
voided as soon as a couple was too old to reproduce, and sterile
people wouldn't be allowed to marry.
Actually, that's where you are wrong. Marriage has long been used as a way
to legitimize reproduction.
That's ridiculous. Are you saying that reproduction didn';t occur
before the concept of marriage came about? Sorry, reproduction didn't
need to be 'legitimized'.
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Of
course not. Most people back in the day didn't get married until they were
ready to reproduce. And in the old day, they didn't reproduce until they
got married.
again, this is based was in religious mythology.
See how it works?
Who's yer daddy, boy?!
King of SCAA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Klien Bottle none" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 09:39:33 AM |
|
|
(Jefferson Brady) wrote in
news:3fdb00e5.59503593@news.west.earthlink.net:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:10:59 GMT, Klein Bottle <none> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:o08ltvo7rimu8u73mf9qqs78648vi4kmge@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com>
posted in alt.atheism:
Someone with mixed up DNA probably can't produce children so a
marriage would not be consummated with anyone.
Marriage is not legally about reproduction. If it were, it would be
voided as soon as a couple was too old to reproduce, and sterile
people wouldn't be allowed to marry.
Actually, that's where you are wrong. Marriage has long been used as
a way to legitimize reproduction.
That's ridiculous. Are you saying that reproduction didn';t occur
before the concept of marriage came about? Sorry, reproduction didn't
need to be 'legitimized'.
No, of course not. However, as societies developed and became more
complex, marriage was a way to legitimize reproduction.
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Why did societies from upon pre-marital sex? Considering sex is how
reproduction is done?
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Yes. Lots of bad ideas. Like being good to your fellow man.
Unfortunately, religion's main tenets are good, but it has become far too
organized.
Of
course not. Most people back in the day didn't get married until they
were ready to reproduce. And in the old day, they didn't reproduce
until they got married.
again, this is based was in religious mythology.
No, it was based on the notion that strong families contribute to the
social fabric, and out of wedlock childbirths contribute to the decline
of society.
Hey, the black out of wedlock birthrate now stands at 70%. In the early
1960s, it was around 25%. What has happened to black crime during that
time? What has happened to black welfare dependence?
Do you not see a correlation between out of wedlock births and the
breakdown of social order?
One out of every 3 black men will serve time in prison. Think about
that.
Who's yer daddy, boy?!
King of SCAA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hypatia Kosh" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 05:51:13 PM |
|
|
Klien Bottle <none> wrote in message news:<a0d601ffb8dc05e72ded1c5f618fa09a@news.teranews.com>...
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Concept, nothing. You put the cart before the horse.
Human pairbonding is a consequence of our big, fat brains and our need
to raise our dependent young for so very long.
Marriage is a societal custom to enforce some sort of sexual order.
Stay with the babies you make, don't impregnate females willy-nilly
and cause havoc. Otherwise you have men jealously fighting over the
right to impregnate females and it gets real ugly real quick.
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
Pairbonding exists because we are human, and because we have an
instinct to love and care for our offspring, and a deep need to love
and be loved in return.
-Hypatia Kosh
--
Hey, who needs physics when you've got LUUHVVV!! :-P
--Farfalla, Jan 6, 2003
http://hypatia.slashcity.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 09:51:32 PM |
|
|
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312131551.2a8efc01@posting.google.com...
Klien Bottle <none> wrote in message
news:<a0d601ffb8dc05e72ded1c5f618fa09a@news.teranews.com>...
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Concept, nothing. You put the cart before the horse.
Human pairbonding is a consequence of our big, fat brains and our need
to raise our dependent young for so very long.
Marriage is a societal custom to enforce some sort of sexual order.
Stay with the babies you make, don't impregnate females willy-nilly
and cause havoc. Otherwise you have men jealously fighting over the
right to impregnate females and it gets real ugly real quick.
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
So we have time to go at each other's throats for a myriad of other reasons.
Religion,
territory, resources, etc.... (btw, marriage doesn't seen to ever keep a
determined man, or woman
for that matter, from abandoning their children.)
Pairbonding exists because we are human, and because we have an
instinct to love and care for our offspring, and a deep need to love
and be loved in return.
-Hypatia Kosh
--
Hey, who needs physics when you've got LUUHVVV!! :-P
--Farfalla, Jan 6, 2003
http://hypatia.slashcity.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hypatia Kosh" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 08:56:29 PM |
|
|
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<87RCb.3312$Pg1.2416@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312131551.2a8efc01@posting.google.com...
Klien Bottle <none> wrote in message
news:<a0d601ffb8dc05e72ded1c5f618fa09a@news.teranews.com>...
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Concept, nothing. You put the cart before the horse.
Human pairbonding is a consequence of our big, fat brains and our need
to raise our dependent young for so very long.
Marriage is a societal custom to enforce some sort of sexual order.
Stay with the babies you make, don't impregnate females willy-nilly
and cause havoc. Otherwise you have men jealously fighting over the
right to impregnate females and it gets real ugly real quick.
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
So we have time to go at each other's throats for a myriad of other reasons.
Religion,
territory, resources, etc.... (btw, marriage doesn't seen to ever keep a
determined man, or woman
for that matter, from abandoning their children.)
Well, of course not, but back in its heyday it was a pretty powerful
social force. However, the very poor and the very rich have always
been adept at abandoning their children, grace a economic hardship, or
just for convenience.
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
-Hypatia Kosh
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 09:55:01 PM |
|
|
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<87RCb.3312$Pg1.2416@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312131551.2a8efc01@posting.google.com...
Klien Bottle <none> wrote in message
news:<a0d601ffb8dc05e72ded1c5f618fa09a@news.teranews.com>...
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Concept, nothing. You put the cart before the horse.
Human pairbonding is a consequence of our big, fat brains and our need
to raise our dependent young for so very long.
Marriage is a societal custom to enforce some sort of sexual order.
Stay with the babies you make, don't impregnate females willy-nilly
and cause havoc. Otherwise you have men jealously fighting over the
right to impregnate females and it gets real ugly real quick.
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
So we have time to go at each other's throats for a myriad of other
reasons.
Religion,
territory, resources, etc.... (btw, marriage doesn't seen to ever keep
a
determined man, or woman
for that matter, from abandoning their children.)
Well, of course not, but back in its heyday it was a pretty powerful
social force.
Was it? Or did it just seem pretty powerful?
However, the very poor and the very rich have always
been adept at abandoning their children, grace a economic hardship, or
just for convenience.
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
-Hypatia Kosh
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hypatia Kosh" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
15 Dec 2003 02:55:12 PM |
|
|
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
--
"Counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor . . ?
Death's too good for them." -- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
15 Dec 2003 04:35:33 PM |
|
|
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312151255.4a9a7009@posting.google.com...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
Thanks, I check it out.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 11:30:22 AM |
|
|
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states. Thus
making liars out of the insistent argument that "gay marriages are more
stable." (We knew that already.)
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V1662.AP-Gay-Divorce.html
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 04:39:59 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states.
*****. No other states recognize Vermont's civil unions, and would not
recognize the
relationship, or conduct a divorce.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 05:50:05 PM |
|
|
Light Templar wrote:
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states.
*****. No other states recognize Vermont's civil unions, and would not
recognize the
relationship, or conduct a divorce.
You didn't read the news story on the link.
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 06:57:38 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:50:05 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
Light Templar wrote:
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states.
*****. No other states recognize Vermont's civil unions, and would not
recognize the
relationship, or conduct a divorce.
You didn't read the news story on the link.
He can't read and his mother keys his posts for him
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "maf 1029" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
17 Dec 2003 06:07:35 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:57:38 GMT, Wild Bill Taylor wrote:
He ca
Must suck to be an X-no-archive coward, Billy.
Please forward all replies to:
Bill Taylor
5150 Balboa Drive
New Berlin, WI 53151
414-425-3429
Check out the source of Billy's constant frustration at:
http://www.absolutearts.com/portfolios/w/wilhelm
To make further comments about Billy's mental health issues, please
forward all memos to:
abuse@teranews.com
abuse@cox.net
and
Executive PC, Inc.
2105 S 170th
New berlin, WI 53151 USA
ALL INFORMATION ABOVE IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD AND IS AVAILABLE
FROM NUMEROUS PUBLIC ON-LINE SOURCES
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 05:28:17 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:39:59 GMT, "Light Templar"
<I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states.
*****. No other states recognize Vermont's civil unions, and would not
recognize the relationship, or conduct a divorce.
You stupid, uninformed ***** sucker. Anyone as disablingly ignorant as
you should be put out of their misery:;
********************************************************************************
Iowa Judge Approves Gay Divorce
Friday, December 12, 2003
SIOUX CITY, Iowa A county judge approved a divorce for a lesbian
couple who obtained a civil union in Vermont, saying he didn't realize
he was signing a settlement for a same-sex couple, but ultimately
decided to let his decision stand.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105566,00.html
**********************************************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
17 Dec 2003 07:58:39 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 23:28:17 GMT, Wild Bill Taylor wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:39:59 GMT, "Light Templar"
<I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states.
*****. No other states recognize Vermont's civil unions, and would not
recognize the relationship, or conduct a divorce.
You stupid, uninformed ***** sucker. Anyone as disablingly ignorant as
you should be put out of their misery:;
********************************************************************************
Iowa Judge Approves Gay Divorce
Friday, December 12, 2003
SIOUX CITY, Iowa A county judge approved a divorce for a lesbian
couple who obtained a civil union in Vermont, saying he didn't realize
he was signing a settlement for a same-sex couple, but ultimately
decided to let his decision stand.
And the important thing is that last sentence. He DID let his
decision stand!
WEIRD Bill -- your bigoted comments, above, are NOW archived in
Google -- permanently -- in THIS post. COUNT on this happening with
regularity, coward.
For as long as Google exists, everyone can thus be REMINDED of just
HOW utterly hateful and idiotic losers like you and your ilk really are!
-- Craig Chilton
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "NoGoals" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 05:33:03 PM |
|
|
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com>...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states. Thus
making liars out of the insistent argument that "gay marriages are more
stable." (We knew that already.)
Current het divorce rate approx. 50%. Current gay divorce rate less
then .01%. That sure is a strong reasoned arguement you put forth,
Bobby boy.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V1662.AP-Gay-Divorce.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
16 Dec 2003 05:53:12 PM |
|
|
NoGoals wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com>...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states. Thus
making liars out of the insistent argument that "gay marriages are more
stable." (We knew that already.)
Current het divorce rate approx. 50%. Current gay divorce rate less
then .01%. That sure is a strong reasoned arguement you put forth,
Bobby boy.
Another rump rider pulls a "statistic" out of his sore arse.
Pathetic.
Bob
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V1662.AP-Gay-Divorce.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoGoals" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
17 Dec 2003 12:41:56 PM |
|
|
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF9AE8.7020207@hotmail.com>...
NoGoals wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF412E.2040200@hotmail.com>...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message news:<pgaDb.4766$Pg1.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
"Hypatia Kosh" <berli@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:fb1e5579.0312141856.b49641f@posting.google.com...
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor last year which talked about the transition from
polygamous societies to monogamous ones, and the role of marriage in
that.
Thanks, if you come across a more specific citation, I'll check it out.
I *think* this is the book I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060931566/qid=1071521479/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4278819-5248601?v=glance&s=books
A History of the Wife by M. Yalom
-Hypatia Kosh
The lolly lickers who went so gleefully to Vermont last year to get a
"civil union" are already filing for divorce in other states. Thus
making liars out of the insistent argument that "gay marriages are more
stable." (We knew that already.)
Current het divorce rate approx. 50%. Current gay divorce rate less
then .01%. That sure is a strong reasoned arguement you put forth,
Bobby boy.
Another rump rider pulls a "statistic" out of his sore arse.
You're a funny little pissant....
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
15 Dec 2003 09:25:30 AM |
|
|
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
There was an interesting book on the history of marriage written by a
Brandeis professor
-Hypatia Kosh
LOL. As if anything coming out of an institution specializing in
misandrist bigotry has any scholarly merit. More feminist revisionist
history well sprinkled with victimology no doubt.
Bob
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 07:08:15 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 03:51:32 GMT, "Light Templar"
<I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> posted in alt.atheism:
So we have time to go at each other's throats for a myriad of other reasons.
Religion,
territory, resources, etc.... (btw, marriage doesn't seen to ever keep a
determined man, or woman
for that matter, from abandoning their children.)
Or even killing them - but luckily not everyone is a religious nut.
--
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he
unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."
-- Bertrand Russell.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 07:13:37 PM |
|
|
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
-Hypatia Kosh
Your misandry combined with your straight hate make you doubly unwelcome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hypatia Kosh" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 08:52:31 PM |
|
|
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDBB941.6040704@hotmail.com>...
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
-Hypatia Kosh
Your misandry combined with your straight hate make you doubly unwelcome.
I'm straight? And I hate men?
I love men! They're so cute! Especially when they're in love with each
other! Check it out:
http://www.thyla.com/
http://hypatia.slashcity.org/slash/
http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/
http://spirk.cosmicduckling.com/
I love straight people too! Well, at least the girls! Aw, gosh, the
guys too:
http://hypatia.slashcity.org/slash/slash.html
Stay tuned--I'm working on a f/m/m threesome story as we speak. Alien
sex with Saavik from STII. It's gonna be pretty cool.
-Hypatia
--
"Counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor . . ?
Death's too good for them." -- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 07:07:14 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:13:37 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> posted
in alt.atheism:
Hypatia Kosh wrote:
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
-Hypatia Kosh
Your misandry combined with your straight hate make you doubly unwelcome.
To say nothing of your homophobia and treason.
--
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
14 Dec 2003 07:06:38 PM |
|
|
On 13 Dec 2003 15:51:13 -0800, (Hypatia Kosh) posted
in alt.atheism:
Marriage is a societal custom to enforce some sort of sexual order.
Stay with the babies you make, don't impregnate females willy-nilly
and cause havoc. Otherwise you have men jealously fighting over the
right to impregnate females and it gets real ugly real quick.
And, judging by human psychology, it was the norm for a very long
time.
Marriage basically exists to keep men from going at each other's
throats, and to keep men from abandoning their children.
Pairbonding exists because we are human, and because we have an
instinct to love and care for our offspring, and a deep need to love
and be loved in return.
And luckily, but not necessarily, the two work well together.
--
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education and social
ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he
had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
-Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 10:56:10 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:39:33 GMT, Klien Bottle <none> posted in
alt.atheism:
Why did societies from upon pre-marital sex?
Most didn't. (Remember, there were more societies before the
Judeo/Christian religion was invented than there have been since. And
there are STILL societies - or were until very recently - in which
"marriage" didn't exist.) Next incompetent question?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Yes. Lots of bad ideas. Like being good to your fellow man.
As long as he was of the "correct" religion. People of other
religions weren't really people. (Show how Christians were "good" to
Moslems during the Crusades.)
Unfortunately, religion's main tenets are good, but it has become far too
organized.
Aside from the organization, religion's main tenets are to appease the
gods. Not what sane people would call a good thing.
again, this is based was in religious mythology.
No, it was based on the notion that strong families contribute to the
social fabric
And families were bound (made strong) by things other than marriage.
(Which things depended on the time and the place.) There were many
strong families long before there was formalized marriage.
and out of wedlock childbirths contribute to the decline of society.
In and of themselves? How?
Hey, the black out of wedlock birthrate now stands at 70%. In the early
1960s, it was around 25%. What has happened to black crime during that
time? What has happened to black welfare dependence?
Where is the causation? (Correlation is not causation, and you don't
even have Correlation.)
Do you not see a correlation between out of wedlock births and the
breakdown of social order?
Show it.
One out of every 3 black men will serve time in prison. Think about
that.
Think about showing how this is due to illegitimate births.
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jefferson Brady" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 10:01:59 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:39:33 GMT, Klien Bottle <none> wrote:
rightiswrong@home.org (Jefferson Brady) wrote in
news:3fdb00e5.59503593@news.west.earthlink.net:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:10:59 GMT, Klein Bottle <none> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:o08ltvo7rimu8u73mf9qqs78648vi4kmge@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com>
posted in alt.atheism:
Someone with mixed up DNA probably can't produce children so a
marriage would not be consummated with anyone.
Marriage is not legally about reproduction. If it were, it would be
voided as soon as a couple was too old to reproduce, and sterile
people wouldn't be allowed to marry.
Actually, that's where you are wrong. Marriage has long been used as
a way to legitimize reproduction.
That's ridiculous. Are you saying that reproduction didn';t occur
before the concept of marriage came about? Sorry, reproduction didn't
need to be 'legitimized'.
No, of course not. However, as societies developed and became more
complex, marriage was a way to legitimize reproduction.
Reproduction doesn't need to be legitimized.
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Are you aware that there literally millions of couples in this country
who either can not or chose not to reproduce? Should they be denied
the right to marry?
Why did societies from upon pre-marital sex? Considering sex is how
reproduction is done?
They didn't until the invention of religion.
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Yes. Lots of bad ideas. Like being good to your fellow man.
No, that's a good idea but it exists independently of religion.
Unfortunately, religion's main tenets are good, but it has become far too
organized.
Of
course not. Most people back in the day didn't get married until they
were ready to reproduce. And in the old day, they didn't reproduce
until they got married.
again, this is based was in religious mythology.
No, it was based on the notion that strong families contribute to the
social fabric, and out of wedlock childbirths contribute to the decline
of society.
Not true. IN the early civilizations there were clans, for that
purpose and women and men in those clans were not prohibited from
mating with whoever the dominate male happened to be at the time.
Hey, the black out of wedlock birthrate now stands at 70%. In the early
1960s, it was around 25%. What has happened to black crime during that
time? What has happened to black welfare dependence?
This statement borders on racism.
Do you not see a correlation between out of wedlock births and the
breakdown of social order?
No. I haven't seen a breakdown of social order. Crime has always
existed and it has always been more prevalent amongst the poor and the
oppressed.
One out of every 3 black men will serve time in prison. Think about
that.
I have thought about it. Often. Have you ever lived in the inner city?
Who's yer daddy, boy?!
King of SCAA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 02:26:16 PM |
|
|
"Jefferson Brady" <rightiswrong@home.org> wrote in message
news:3fe63696.73248796@news.west.earthlink.net...
[snip]
Are you aware that there literally millions of couples in this country
who either can not or chose not to reproduce? Should they be denied
the right to marry?
Point of information: According to the 2000 U.S. census, the majority of
married opposite-sex couples do _not_ have a child living at home.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 10:21:56 AM |
|
|
Jefferson Brady wrote:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:39:33 GMT, Klien Bottle <none> wrote:
rightiswrong@home.org (Jefferson Brady) wrote in
news:3fdb00e5.59503593@news.west.earthlink.net:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:10:59 GMT, Klein Bottle <none> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:o08ltvo7rimu8u73mf9qqs78648vi4kmge@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com>
posted in alt.atheism:
Someone with mixed up DNA probably can't produce children so a
marriage would not be consummated with anyone.
Marriage is not legally about reproduction. If it were, it would be
voided as soon as a couple was too old to reproduce, and sterile
people wouldn't be allowed to marry.
Actually, that's where you are wrong. Marriage has long been used as
a way to legitimize reproduction.
That's ridiculous. Are you saying that reproduction didn';t occur
before the concept of marriage came about? Sorry, reproduction didn't
need to be 'legitimized'.
No, of course not. However, as societies developed and became more
complex, marriage was a way to legitimize reproduction.
Reproduction doesn't need to be legitimized.
Hence the gay agenda of destroying marriage and families.
Sorry Charlie. Most people think that stable families are important for
raising the next generation of people.
Afterall, why would anyone get married if not for the concept of
reproduction?
Exactly. That is what marriage is all about, encouraging and supporting
the huge cost of raising children.
Are you aware that there literally millions of couples in this country
who either can not or chose not to reproduce? Should they be denied
the right to marry?
What would be the point of providing societal benefits to anyone who
isn't bearing the cost of the next generation?
Why did societies from upon pre-marital sex? Considering sex is how
reproduction is done?
They didn't until the invention of religion.
Cite?
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Yes. Lots of bad ideas. Like being good to your fellow man.
No, that's a good idea but it exists independently of religion.
Marriage is much older than any contemporary religions.
Unfortunately, religion's main tenets are good, but it has become far too
organized.
Of
course not. Most people back in the day didn't get married until they
were ready to reproduce. And in the old day, they didn't reproduce
until they got married.
again, this is based was in religious mythology.
No, it was based on the notion that strong families contribute to the
social fabric, and out of wedlock childbirths contribute to the decline
of society.
Not true. IN the early civilizations there were clans, for that
purpose and women and men in those clans were not prohibited from
mating with whoever the dominate male happened to be at the time.
Cite!
Hey, the black out of wedlock birthrate now stands at 70%. In the early
1960s, it was around 25%. What has happened to black crime during that
time? What has happened to black welfare dependence?
This statement borders on racism.
IOW: Any opinion you disagree with is "hate." Pathetic.
Do you not see a correlation between out of wedlock births and the
breakdown of social order?
No. I haven't seen a breakdown of social order. Crime has always
existed and it has always been more prevalent amongst the poor and the
oppressed.
So since society has already been partly destroyed, you advocate
finishing the job rather than restoring the social institutions?
That's backward.
Bob
One out of every 3 black men will serve time in prison. Think about
that.
I have thought about it. Often. Have you ever lived in the inner city?
Who's yer daddy, boy?!
King of SCAA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
13 Dec 2003 11:04:58 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:21:56 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> posted
in alt.atheism:
Jefferson Brady wrote:
Reproduction doesn't need to be legitimized.
Hence the gay agenda of destroying marriage and families.
If heterosexual marriage is so weak that homosexual marriage will
destroy it, it doesn't deserve to exist.
Sorry Charlie. Most people think that stable families are important for
raising the next generation of people.
And SANE people realize that a homosexual marriage can be as stable as
a heterosexual marriage - and that most long-term homosexual
relationships are MORE stable than most heterosexual marriages.
Exactly. That is what marriage is all about, encouraging and supporting
the huge cost of raising children.
Not at all. Married couples aren't required to reproduce. They
aren't even required to be CAPABLE of reproducing. MArriage is
strictly a legal/economic arrangement.
Are you aware that there literally millions of couples in this country
who either can not or chose not to reproduce? Should they be denied
the right to marry?
What would be the point of providing societal benefits to anyone who
isn't bearing the cost of the next generation?
It's none of your business whether my wife and I have children or not,
as long as we don;t have children who injure you.
Why did societies from upon pre-marital sex? Considering sex is how
reproduction is done?
They didn't until the invention of religion.
Cite?
Sorry, but the burden of proof is yours. Cite that all societies
prior to the invention of religion frowned on premarital sex. No one
has the burden of disproving your assertions.
Otherwise, no one would have ever gotten married, now would they?
Marriage is an idea born in religious mythology as were a lot of bad
ideas.
Yes. Lots of bad ideas. Like being good to your fellow man.
No, that's a good idea but it exists independently of religion.
Marriage is much older than any contemporary religions.
Contemporary? That's not the claim.
Hey, the black out of wedlock birthrate now stands at 70%. In the early
1960s, it was around 25%. What has happened to black crime during that
time? What has happened to black welfare dependence?
This statement borders on racism.
IOW: Any opinion you disagree with is "hate." Pathetic.
No, but your lame attempt at an ad hom is.
Do you not see a correlation between out of wedlock births and the
breakdown of social order?
No. I haven't seen a breakdown of social order. Crime has always
existed and it has always been more prevalent amongst the poor and the
oppressed.
So since society has already been partly destroyed
Evidence?
you advocate finishing the job rather than restoring the social institutions?
That's backward.
Evidence that forcing all pregnant women to be married would reverse
the "destruction" of civilization?
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
