SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Polite Political Discussion- is it Possible? An Experiment.

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumar89 who wrote (460)8/4/2006 10:45:06 AM
From: RambiRead Replies (1) of 1695
 
There are so many things I question about your post, I don't know exactly where to start. I will just pick a couple, because of lack of time.

Im not sure why you think mixed race marriage has been acceptable. Mixed race marriages, even if not always legally banned, received great social opprobrium, sometimes ostracism, sometimes worse. Mixed race couples still get raised eyebrows among older people, though I think the younger generation accepts them more easily. Just as they accept gay couples.

NONE did. EVER. I will be honest and tell you I can't tell you a reason why this is so

I think the reason is paired with what I was saying earlier. Marriage in all its early forms was a way of structuring and gathering wealth and land and of course, continuing the human race. As our definition of marriage began to emphasize romantic love over procreation, and women became equals rather than property, the reasons to exclude others from the definition lost weight. If the properties change, then the boundaries may also change. I think this is where we are in time.

The polygamy, etc., issues are side issues at this time. If public debate is called for, great. Lumping them together now- particularly when you include incest or pedophilia- muddies it too much and is unfair to gays in that their predicament gets overlaid with some even more serious moral objections and fears.

As for sexless marriages, sex is far more of a motivator now than before when marriages were arranged for practical purposes. Again, I think that's one of the changes that has brought us to this point. We marry for love. In a way, the changes you fear- all those convenience arrangements-- were far more prevalent in other times. Friends, huge age differences, granddaughters living with grandfathers; your objection (and one that would need to be dealt with) is that now you are concerned public money would support these.

Yes, I do think there is harm. Anytime people are treated as less than equal, it is harmful. And gays are still treated as deviates and a problem.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext