Joe Biden endorses gay marriage
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:33:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Joe Biden endorses gay marriage
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Joe Biden endorses gay marriage  (Read 5796 times)
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2012, 10:24:23 AM »

Dictionaries can be changed. That much is only a function of language.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2012, 11:08:18 AM »

Dictionaries can be changed. That much is only a function of language.

then be honest - you want to redefine marriage.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2012, 11:23:39 AM »

Dictionaries can be changed. That much is only a function of language.

then be honest - you want to redefine marriage.

I never said I wanted to, just that it could be done by the standard he's presenting. That's a huge difference.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2012, 11:49:42 AM »

...as it was in the days of Lot, even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

You mean they had a nice Vice President then too?
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2012, 12:17:05 PM »

Dictionaries can be changed. That much is only a function of language.

then be honest - you want to redefine marriage.

There's a long tradition of redefining marriage, starting from the creation of civil marriage, the change in women's status from property to equal partner, changing views on divorce, the allowance of interfaith marriages, development of marriage for love, development of marriage for seniors, and the legalization of interracial marriage. Within the current definition of marriage, allowing same-sex unions to be counted is not as dramatic as other changes.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: May 08, 2012, 12:47:22 PM »

Dictionaries can be changed. That much is only a function of language.

then be honest - you want to redefine marriage.

There's a long tradition of redefining marriage, starting from the creation of civil marriage, the change in women's status from property to equal partner, changing views on divorce, the allowance of interfaith marriages, development of marriage for love, development of marriage for seniors, and the legalization of interracial marriage. Within the current definition of marriage, allowing same-sex unions to be counted is not as dramatic as other changes.

dude, those are NOT changes to the definition of marriage, for there are thousands of years of history.

Heck, you can find examples of everything bolded, even in the bible.

Historically, you had recognition of marriages without a certificate of marriage (the couple simply had to present themselves to the public as husband and wife), marriages between seniors, marriages between the races.

Though, I have no idea what you mean by “development of marriage for love”…as if marrying for love’s sake is something new…as if it was always forced and pre-arranged?


Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2012, 01:13:32 PM »
« Edited: May 08, 2012, 01:34:38 PM by Nathan »

It was certainly considered a type of business contract in most civilizations. Maybe among the peasantry there was greater leeway but that's certainly not normative in the historical record.

Marriage really isn't one of those things that you can present as normative from and for eternity (at least, not from a historical perspective; from a religious perspective you certainly can if you're not hung up on the historical perspective) without going through some pretty convoluted retroactive redefinition anyway.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: May 08, 2012, 01:41:54 PM »
« Edited: May 08, 2012, 02:15:22 PM by consigliere jmfcst »

It was certainly considered a type of business contract in most civilizations. Maybe among the peasantry there was greater leeway but that's certainly not normative in the historical record.

Marriage really isn't one of those things that you can present as normative from and for eternity (at least, not from a historical perspective; from a religious perspective you certainly can if you're not hung up on the historical perspective) without going through some pretty convoluted retroactive redefinition anyway.

are you saying the bible doesn't view marriage as a contract of love?
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: May 08, 2012, 02:13:22 PM »

Could someone explain to me what the legal difference between civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples is in the United States?
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: May 08, 2012, 02:20:27 PM »

Could someone explain to me what the legal difference between civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples is in the United States?

Aside from taxes and health insurance and all the privileges married couples enjoy?
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: May 08, 2012, 02:22:44 PM »

Could someone explain to me what the legal difference between civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples is in the United States?

Aside from taxes and health insurance and all the privileges married couples enjoy?

actually, for the vast majority of cases, there is a tax penalty for being married.

and, what, exactly are these "privileges"?
Logged
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: May 08, 2012, 02:37:43 PM »

Could someone explain to me what the legal difference between civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples is in the United States?

Main legal difference is recognition I believe.

There has been no compact for states to recognize other states' civil unions like there has been for marriage (in addition to making the federal government not recognize any same-sex marriage, the federal DOMA law also said states can choose to avoid to recognize other states' marriages if it is between a same-sex couple) and there are many federal legal rights and benefits (such as spousal/survivor Social Security benefits) that civil unions will not confer unless the statutes are rewritten to include civil unions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: May 08, 2012, 02:39:17 PM »

It was certainly considered a type of business contract in most civilizations. Maybe among the peasantry there was greater leeway but that's certainly not normative in the historical record.

Marriage really isn't one of those things that you can present as normative from and for eternity (at least, not from a historical perspective; from a religious perspective you certainly can if you're not hung up on the historical perspective) without going through some pretty convoluted retroactive redefinition anyway.

are you saying the bible doesn't view marriage as a contract of love?

Well, I mean, that's normative within the Bible, certainly, but it's hard to argue that it's the case with every specific marriage presented or discussed. I'm not really discussing the Bible here anyway, more the general way things were structured in ancient societies (and many modern societies, for that matter).
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,664
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: May 08, 2012, 03:04:07 PM »

Marriage for love as an ideal has always existed, though other concerns have often taken precedence.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: May 08, 2012, 03:14:35 PM »

Marriage for love as an ideal has always existed, though other concerns have often taken precedence.

Exactly. What constitutes that ideal is culturally specific, as is how frequently it's upheld, but that core has always been there. The point is that practically nothing else, certainly nothing of the practice, has been universal.
Logged
Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook
The Obamanation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: May 08, 2012, 03:57:11 PM »

...as it was in the days of Noah, even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
Fixed. Don't misquote The Bible for your own benefit.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: May 08, 2012, 04:09:26 PM »

...as it was in the days of Lot Noah, even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
Fixed. Don't misquote The Bible for your own benefit.

are you serious?  it wasn't a quote, it was a paraphrase, here is the actual quote:

Luke 17:26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.  28 “It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed".

So, either way you slice it, my statement may not have been verbatim, but it was still accurate.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: May 09, 2012, 11:00:20 PM »


Well we both were quite off.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.044 seconds with 12 queries.