View Poll Results: Marriages without children should be dissolved

Voters
62. You may not vote on this poll
  • Agreed, dissolve them!

    2 3.23%
  • Disagree, marriage ain't just about children

    60 96.77%
Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 203

Thread: Marriages without children should be dissolved

  1. #51
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by sweEt Mauritius View Post
    I've asked you the same question three times and you haven't addressed it at all. See my previous post when you return because I honestly would like to know your response.
    I have. See my previous post, and post 43. If you still don't get it, I give up trying to explain it.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  2. #52
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You are starting to have an awful lot of exceptions. Childless marriages, exception. Strait couples who need help conceiving, exception. Gay couples who have kids already, exception. It's starting to look like your exceptions to the rule are to the point of invalidating the rule.
    Redress, in the fundamentals of biology, male-female is a reproductive unit.

    Male-male is not. Female-female is not. Not without adding a third person to the equation.

    You can deny that it is important, but you can't deny that it is a fact.

    I really do have to go now, sorry.

    10characters...

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  3. #53
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:24 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,324
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Redress, in the fundamentals of biology, male-female is a reproductive unit.

    Male-male is not. Female-female is not. Not without adding a third person to the equation.

    You can deny that it is important, but you can't deny that it is a fact.

    I really do have to go now, sorry.
    You are not keeping up with the modern world Goshin. Almost every one uses doctors. The world has changed, time to catch up with it.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #54
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    According to some on the anti-gay marriage side, marriage is for making babies. Therefore, do you believe that those who either cannot or will not procreate should have their marriages dissolved?
    Not to say I agree with people against gay marriage but marriage, in and of itself, isn't about having kids.
    It's about pooling resources, both emotional and physical.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #55
    User sweEt Mauritius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    07-15-12 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    79

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Sigh. I can't answer half a dozen different people in any reasonable time frame. See post number 43.
    If same-sex couples and infertile opposite-sex couples are identical with regard to the primary societal reason for marriage, then why should they be treated differently under the law, or by society for that matter? You have not answered that question, not in post 43 or anywhere.

    If we're talking about reproduction and raising of children, the primary societal reason for encouraging marriage, Group A (fertile opposite-sex couples) is different from groups B (same-sex couples) AND C (infertile opposite-sex couples), while groups B and C are IDENTICAL. How, therefore, does it make any sense to treat groups A and C (who are fundamentally different with regard to reproduction and raising of children) the same, while treating groups B and C (who are fundamentally identical with regard to reproduction and raising of children) differently?
    Last edited by sweEt Mauritius; 06-18-10 at 07:50 PM.

  6. #56
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Not to say I agree with people against gay marriage but marriage, in and of itself, isn't about having kids.
    It's about pooling resources, both emotional and physical.
    That and good ole love. For me, the kids were the last thing on my mind when I got married. I just found a girl I liked and wanted to be with for the rest of my life. She didn't get pregnant until several years later when we decided we should have one.

  7. #57
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    That and good ole love. For me, the kids were the last thing on my mind when I got married. I just found a girl I liked and wanted to be with for the rest of my life. She didn't get pregnant until several years later when we decided we should have one.
    Same with me, although the kid didn't come later
    It came earlier by accident, which was a good accident.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  8. #58
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,547

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Again, the point is not about there being exceptions to the general rule, as I've said plainly there are. The point is that as a building-block of society, straight marriage fulfills the function of family and children without outside aid, while SSM is fundamentally incapable of fulfilling that role without the use of sperm, ova or wombs that do not belong to the two partners-in-marriage.
    Marriages of people in their 70s or even 60s can't fulfill that role even with the use of sperm, ova, etc. Even adoption is inadvisable, as the couple is unlikely to live long enough to raise the child.

    Homosexual couples, on the other hand, can raise chidren, and can even produce them with the help of the things you just mentioned. So, why should a pair of octogenerians be allowed to marry, but a couple of homosexuals not?

    Unless, of course, there is more to marriage than procreation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    A million straight couples: some will reproduce, some will not. As a group, they will typically produce millions of children, typically without the need for intervention from outside the marriage in the conception of same.
    Not one in a million septagenerian couple will produce offsrping. It is unlikey that a sexagenarian couple will, or even one in their fifties. Should they be allowed to marry?


    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    A million gay couples will not produce even ONE child without that outside intervention, because their fundamental nature is non-reproductive.
    Nor will a million octogenerian couples.

    If only people with a chance of reproduction are allowed to marry, then it follows that only people of reproductive age would be allowed to marry. Further, if the only purpose of marriage is having/raising children, then the marriages of those who have finished raising children would be over, having no further purpose.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  9. #59
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    It's an arbitrary distinction. It's entirely meaningless. Doctors are used in the process of childbearing. The ability is there for gay couples to have children. Saying this does not count because, well, because you think it shouldn't does not change the facts.
    When someone starts from a conclusion then they sometimes attach themselves to inane arguments to save face.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  10. #60
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Marriages without children should be dissolved

    What's all this nonsense about marriage being about children?

    Historically, marriage was utilized because it resolved inheritance disputes, conferred titles and honors from the spouse's family, sealed alliances and agreements among leaders and businesses.

    Historically in many societies, women were merely property, having greater status than a slave but not an equal to a freeman or citizen.

    Marriage as an agreement primarily to facilitate the creation and upbringing of children, is a recent invention.

    But let's not leave out the influence of religion. Religion has played a major role in marriage because in the very popular Abrahamic religions, sex outside of marriage is a sin. And children are a natural biproduct of sex. Its important to keep in mind that historically Christianity and Islam do not support marriage because it produces children, but because it is only within a marriage that sex is not a sin.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •