GoldenEagle Posted July 29, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.80 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted July 29, 2014 Interesting dialogue. For those more scientifically inclined. Good, logical presentation. A bit long I know but worth listening to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted July 29, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.80 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 Marrige is a covenant between a single man, and single woman, and GOD. People always leave God out of it. The bible says what God has joined together let not man put asunder. Mark 10:9. Matt. 19:16. Anything aside from what I have just typed is not marrige. I agree with you Cletus. This was a discussion based on the legal and social implications/consequences of marriage. This was the Q&A. There's also a lecture. The lecture speaks more to the Biblical and academic perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted July 29, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.80 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 if nothing else consider this portion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcs1K7Gi9Pg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted July 31, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted July 31, 2014 My response is, the taxation breaks should be extended to consenting adult romantic relationsihps that desire to call themselves legally married. This is just another example of why the state shouldn't be in the marriage business at all. The state is precisely the wrong instiution to look for this sort of moral guidance on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Paid To Destroy The Core Unit Of A Nation? Where Have All The Children Gone, Long Time Ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted August 6, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted August 6, 2014 Paid To Destroy The Core Unit Of A Nation? Where Have All The Children Gone, Long Time Ago How is extending some tax break to people already cohabitating going to destroy the core unit of a nation? They are already doing it. Since when should the state determine who and who isn't *really* married? The easiest solution to this is to take the government out of this business altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTC Posted September 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 18 Topic Count: 200 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 2,795 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 1,502 Days Won: 1 Joined: 06/25/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/26/1952 Share Posted September 6, 2014 From what I've seen, even when a father is a poor excuse for a father, it's better when he stays with his wife. Although this isn't true if he's a monster that abuses his daughters and sons. But when he leaves his family and wants nothing to do with them, the grown children are likely to do what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted September 8, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.80 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 My response is, the taxation breaks should be extended to consenting adult romantic relationsihps that desire to call themselves legally married. This is just another example of why the state shouldn't be in the marriage business at all. The state is precisely the wrong instiution to look for this sort of moral guidance on. So if 3 consenting adults who are involved in a romantic relationship desire to call themselves legally married... Then what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts