Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What will become of marriage?
Rosie Cotton
Inactive Member


Message 271 of 302 (165657)
12-06-2004 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by coffee_addict
12-06-2004 12:47 PM


Re: Really OT but so very important.
Except for the fact that the California travelers were going to attack the "Mormons" and kill them the very next day I think you have it about right.
Anyways, this is called poisoning the well, since you like logic tactics so well, and we are off topic, so we can discuss this some other time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by coffee_addict, posted 12-06-2004 12:47 PM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by coffee_addict, posted 12-06-2004 2:40 PM Rosie Cotton has replied
 Message 280 by Taqless, posted 12-06-2004 3:54 PM Rosie Cotton has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 272 of 302 (165662)
12-06-2004 1:15 PM


It has been stated that in Loving v Virginia, it was determined that marriage is a constitutional right. The following quote was given in support of this conjecture:
The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
This quote does not make marriage a constitutional right, and even more appropriately gay marriage. This appears to be discussing free access to marriage where it exists. I must not if we were to take this as literally as is being done apparently the SCOTUS indicated that it is only a right of men and not women.
If marriage is a constitutional right, then a state would be violating everyone's rights if they were not to have marriage at all, or if they used civil unions instead of marriage. It is unlikely that the scope of that statement was to go that far.
Additionally the statement is clearly discussing the traditional definition of marriage. It speaks of the long recognized need for the ability to marry for ordering the pursuit of their happiness. There was no long tradition of gay marriage which ordered anything.
Because we reject the notion that the mere "equal application" of a statute containing racial classifications is enough to remove the classifications from the Fourteenth Amendment's proscription of all invidious racial discriminations, we do not accept the State's contention that these statutes should be upheld if there is any possible basis for concluding that they serve a rational purpose.
This is definitely something I would use in an argument before a court that marriage rather than separate CUs should be the preferred solution. However it is not an ironclad argument. It does not directly relate to CUs as they would not be a statute containing sexual classification, that are then merely "equally applied."

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

bob_gray
Member (Idle past 5013 days)
Posts: 243
From: Virginia
Joined: 05-03-2004


Message 273 of 302 (165673)
12-06-2004 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Rrhain
12-06-2004 5:44 AM


Compromise?
quote:
Rrhain:
Indeed. If they were actual allies, they would be alienated by those demanding equality. They would be among them because they actually want to achieve equality. If they hesitate, then they aren't really allies and it would be impossible to alienate them because they were never on the side of equality to begin with.
Holmes:
You appear to have missed something. Allies may become alienated, not by the demand for equality, but by the nature of how it is demanded. In fact you completely reject the mention of alternative solutions as proof of traitorship to your cause.
I refused to side with Bush, and I will refuse to side with you on this matter. Diplomacy admits there may be many solutions, even grades of solutions, and that it is possible to win enemies and lose friends based on treatment, rather than theoretical positions.
I am replying to this message even though some of the quote includes what Homes said in message #151 because it seemed relevant to my question.
I'm curious as to why you don't see some sort of a compromise as a possible solution to this issue. It seems to me that the political reality of our system is that compromise is necessary. I think it is pretty clear that most people in government, even if they did agree with your position, would never support gay marriage because it would be political suicide. Although Rosie's opinions on the subject are not a reason to make it law, if there are sufficient people in Rosie's state who feel the same way then they will not be likely to reelect someone who votes for gay marriage. They may however vote for someone who votes for civil unions. If civil unions were the stated method for bringing equality to the system we may find that we have more allies than with a hard line position. If it were possible to enact civil unions which gave people the same benefits as the current definition of marriage would that be such a bad thing?
I understand your position on "separate but equal" is impossible and I agree with it in principle but once again I think that a compromise may be possible and beneficial. Perhaps stuffing gay marriage down the throats of the American sheep would be very satisfying were it possible, but might not we further our aims by slowly changing the system in smaller steps? Say we first move to CUs for gays and then in 10 years, when people have become accustomed to the idea, we do away with government marriage entirely and move everyone to CUs? If someone wants a marriage they can certainly call it that if they want but it wouldn’t appear on legal documents. Just put spouse and spouse instead of husband and wife.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Rrhain, posted 12-06-2004 5:44 AM Rrhain has not replied

1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 274 of 302 (165677)
12-06-2004 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by nator
12-06-2004 10:28 AM


Downy verse cuddles
Schrafinator writes:
I wouldn't mind this stance so much if the LDS church didn't hypocritcally market itself as the cuddly and fluffy religion.
LOL...you saw those commercials too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by nator, posted 12-06-2004 10:28 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by nator, posted 12-06-2004 4:21 PM 1.61803 has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 275 of 302 (165680)
12-06-2004 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Rosie Cotton
12-06-2004 12:52 PM


Re: Really OT but so very important.
You are ignoring what I said.
But forget that for a moment and look at the detail of the massacre. According to history, the Mormons told the settlers that if they would throw their arms down, they would be allowed to walk away. The settlers did that and were led by the Mormons away from the wagons (unarmed) and massacred. I am wondering if Mormon schools actually teach this part of history at all?
Added by edit.
By the way, a group of a few dozen settlers about to take on the entire Mormon colony in Utah of several thousands? How is it self defense?
This message has been edited by Lam, 12-06-2004 02:42 PM

Hate world.
Revenge soon!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 12:52 PM Rosie Cotton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 3:23 PM coffee_addict has not replied

Rosie Cotton
Inactive Member


Message 276 of 302 (165685)
12-06-2004 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by coffee_addict
12-06-2004 2:40 PM


Re: Really OT but so very important.
You know, I think I might tell you, I don't attend a Mormon school. And I'm wondering exactly how anti-Mormon your source is. I would also like to remind you that there are many branch-offs of the Mormon church. I would also like to remind you that this is not the topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by coffee_addict, posted 12-06-2004 2:40 PM coffee_addict has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by crashfrog, posted 12-06-2004 3:36 PM Rosie Cotton has not replied
 Message 281 by NosyNed, posted 12-06-2004 3:58 PM Rosie Cotton has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 277 of 302 (165690)
12-06-2004 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Rosie Cotton
12-06-2004 3:23 PM


I would also like to remind you that this is not the topic.
I second that. The history or legitimacy of the LDS church are in no way relevant to the topic, just as Rosie's religious beliefs are irrelevant to other people living as they choose to live.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 3:23 PM Rosie Cotton has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 278 of 302 (165691)
12-06-2004 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by crashfrog
12-06-2004 10:58 AM


quote:
I thought that was Scientology. I thought LDS was the religion where Native Americans were actually the lost tribe of Jews or whatever.
Yeah. they teach that, too, but they also teach that other stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by crashfrog, posted 12-06-2004 10:58 AM crashfrog has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 279 of 302 (165694)
12-06-2004 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by mike the wiz
12-06-2004 11:14 AM


OK mike I'll go have a look soon.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by mike the wiz, posted 12-06-2004 11:14 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Taqless
Member (Idle past 5913 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 280 of 302 (165697)
12-06-2004 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Rosie Cotton
12-06-2004 12:52 PM


Back to the thread
Would it be possible for you to extricate the religious and romantic views of marriage you seem to possess and strictly look at the legal aspect of it as it is intended in this thread i.e. property, taxes, and the like....?
If not, then maybe we can address your opposition point by point.
If so, do you think that a church should govern this (property, taxes, insurance, etc) in any way?
If so, then whose church?
If not, then do you see a problem with extending that right to a committed, same sex couple?
Remember I'm not asking what you think of homosexuals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 12:52 PM Rosie Cotton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 6:13 PM Taqless has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 281 of 302 (165698)
12-06-2004 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Rosie Cotton
12-06-2004 3:23 PM


LDS branchs
Yes, there are branchs, we have one here in BC that is heavily polygamous. It seems that a LDS church thinks that alternative marriage is perfectly fine and even necessary to get into heaven.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 3:23 PM Rosie Cotton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 6:32 PM NosyNed has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 282 of 302 (165702)
12-06-2004 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Rosie Cotton
12-06-2004 11:20 AM


Re: Really OT but so very important.
quote:
We didn't give full statue to the black men in the church for a long time. I admit it. Until the 1970s. Black men were not permitted to hold the priesthood, a power of God, until the 1970s. The reason that they were not allowed is partly for cultural purposes, and partly because, like other Christian faiths believe, God gave dark skin as a curse. He gave it to Cain, he told him that his skin would be dark, as a curse for killing Abel. He also gave it to the Lamonites, a race of people that are not in the Bible but the book of Mormon.
So, do you still think that people with black skin are cursed, or what?
Isn't it interesting that when the culture at large in the US began to change regarding race as a result of the Civil Rights movement, so did the "interpretations" of the Bible and Book of Mormon your elders and prophets made?
Same with polygamy.
quote:
They do give equal status to women. Women just cannot hold the priesthood. However, you cannot benefit yourself with the priesthood, you can only benefit others.
Well...aren't the main descision and policy makers in the Church exclusively male?
Are there any LDS women who can be prophets, or are they eligable for major leadership positions in the LDS organization in which they are in charge of subordinate men?
IOW, can LDS women rise to the same level of responsibility and leadership and power as men can?
quote:
Women are equal and are loved by Heavenly Father just as much. In fact, very recently our Prophet, who is in his mid-nineties, his wife died, and I have never seen him sadder.
I am sure HF loves women, but it is clear that his LDS church does not treat them as equals.
Women cannot hold the highest position in your religion. They cannot even be priests, or elders, even though some of the baby-faced LDS I have seen wearing the "elder" badge have given me a chuckle.
quote:
Missionaries only teach those who express the desire to teach. If you say "no thank-you, I'm fine", they will go away and never return.
Bull.
I have lived in college towns for most of my adult life and the LDS missionaries are often MUCH more persistent than that. It is also true that the reason they hang out on college campuses so much is because they are likely to find young, isolated or lonely people who are away from their parents. IOW, emotionally vulnerable people that are more likely to convert because they are in a perios of transition or uncertainty in their lives, are living away from home, and don't have their family's support around them.
That is why they don't go hang out in other denominations' church parking lots to try to bag some converts.
My friend that I mentioned was dealing with being molested by her brother when she was younger, and was also having serious second thoughts about the educational and career path she had followed. She was pretty messed up. She is currently a mother of three (after fertility drugs and a c-secion every time) and her perfectly nice Mormon husband is also uneducated and does factory work. They live hand to mouth. She, having a masters degree and many more skills than her husband, is the one who should be out there supporting their family as her earning power is many times his, but the LDS church frowns upon it so she won't do it. She is also clinically depressed.
quote:
I was not allowed to attend my cousin's wedding either. That is because it is a temple wedding, and only baptised individuals, over a certain age may go into the temple.
Her BIRTH PARENTS were not able to witness their only daughter's wedding.
How can the LDS church promote itself as a pro-family religion when they do this kind of thing?
quote:
My father is a convert to the church, and his family has no contact with the church, out of their own free will, and his parent's couldn't attenc my mother and father's wedding either.
Right. They couldn't attend. Don't you think it's wrong to promote a religion as valuing family when you exclude convert's close blood relatives from important events in their lives? Doesn't that send a message that only Mormon families are important or valued by the Mormon church?
quote:
I think you may be confusing your last part with exaltation. Exaltation is the idea, that if we are righteousn enough, we can be exalted and become like Gods, and have children of our own and our own world's and have something just like our Heavenly Father.
You've never heard of Kolob?
quote:
We try to emphasize that we aren't Mormons, because many people have been mistaken and think that we worship a man named Mormon instead of Our Heavenly Father.
Yeah, and the Mormons are also trying to present themselves as a more mainstream Protestant Christian religion.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-06-2004 04:12 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 11:20 AM Rosie Cotton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-06-2004 6:28 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 283 of 302 (165703)
12-06-2004 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by 1.61803
12-06-2004 2:25 PM


Re: Downy verse cuddles
quote:
LOL...you saw those commercials too?
You betcha.
All those nice people of European descent talking about how great the family is.
Of course, if you convert and want your father to give you away at the wedding, well, he's not good enough to go into the Temple.
He's not the "right sort" you know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by 1.61803, posted 12-06-2004 2:25 PM 1.61803 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by AdminNosy, posted 12-06-2004 4:26 PM nator has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 284 of 302 (165704)
12-06-2004 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by nator
12-06-2004 4:21 PM


T o p i c !
Topic is wandering badly. (I think I contributed to that a bit too )

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by nator, posted 12-06-2004 4:21 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by coffee_addict, posted 12-06-2004 5:03 PM AdminNosy has not replied

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 285 of 302 (165710)
12-06-2004 4:46 PM


Nearing the 300 post mark.
It's about time for everyone to get in their last thoughts.
Closing soon.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

Change in Moderation? (General discussion of moderation procedures)
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024