• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Men Won't Marry You

CLAX1911 said:
I'm not sure why you're ranting about Mormons and hundred years ago it really has no bearing on today or this discussion
Click to expand...


In post #81 in which I replied I was replying to this quote I had in posts #81 of this thread:

Quote Originally Posted by calamity

I posit that it is men who want monogamy--not for themselves, but of the woman.
Click to expand...

Mormon men originally did not practice monogamy. And if American men wanted to keep their wives sexually loyal to them only, they do not need monogamy as a law for men, as Islam proves. And there would have been no reason for American Christian men in the 1800s Army and U.S. Government to slaughter Mormon men for belonging to a community of people that practice taking multiple wives.

Why did Jesus in the Bible say a man is only to take one wife? His answer or reason had zero to do with "science" or "sociology." His reason given was theological: Man and woman become one, and what God has made one, let no man divide. (That's what I remember off the top of my head).

Anti-Christian secularist feminist, before the rise of gay marriage, tried to justify and promote monogamy (they did not want men given the right to take multiple wives) by arguing in any society where men are allowed more than one wife women become abused by men. But assuming for the moment that is true (I'm not persuaded it is), what the hell does that have to do now with lesbians and gay men that want to marry a member of their same sex? Nada. Nothing.
 
FastPace said:
In post #81 in which I replied I was replying to this quote I had in posts #81 of this thread:



Mormon men originally did not practice monogamy. And if American men wanted to keep their wives sexually loyal to them only, they do not need monogamy as a law for men, as Islam proves. And there would have been no reason for American Christian men in the 1800s Army and U.S. Government to slaughter Mormon men for belonging to a community of people that practice taking multiple wives.

Why did Jesus in the Bible say a man is only to take one wife? His answer or reason had zero to do with "science" or "sociology." His reason given was theological: Man and woman become one, and what God has made one, let no man divide. (That's what I remember off the top of my head).

Anti-Christian secularist feminist, before the rise of gay marriage, tried to justify and promote monogamy (they did not want men given the right to take multiple wives) by arguing in any society where men are allowed more than one wife women become abused by men. But assuming for the moment that is true (I'm not persuaded it is), what the hell does that have to do now with lesbians and gay men that want to marry a member of their same sex? Nada. Nothing.
Click to expand...

I don't care about Mormonism. I don't km new why you are responding to me with an argument against calamity.
 
calamity said:
Ah...but are women allowed to divorce men?
Click to expand...

In the secular USA or are you talking Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodoxy, Islam etc?

Catholicism does not grant divorces to either men or women. Or if they do it is in limited situations. Catholicism grants annulments (meaning a sacramental marriage never existed).

Protestantism grants divorces although it used to place a stigma on those that got them. Protestantism does not view marriage as sacramental hence it allows divorces.

Orthodoxy grants divorces for certain reasons (e.g., a woman's husband becomes drug addicted), and it uses the power of economia given to the Bishops to do so, as marriage is one of their sacraments and man is not supposed to divide what God has joined as one. But out of mercy and the fact not all people have the sane situations, economia is practiced.

And, therein lies the rub here too. If the man is ready to leave a marriage, no problem. If the woman is---she better get a restraining order and take lessons on how best to shoot a gun under duress.
Click to expand...

Some men, too many, have that attitude no woman let alone their wife can leave them. A control issue.

I can't deny there are men like that. You hear and read about them all the time.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I don't care about Mormonism. I don't km new why you are responding to me with an argument against calamity.
Click to expand...

:lol: Oh, never mind. Somewhere along the lines some confusion developed, either along my line, your line, or maybe both our lines.

Sometimes, when I post in multiple threads in different sections of the board, I don't even remember 100% what a person is responding to in something earlier I posted.
 
FastPace said:
In the secular USA or are you talking Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodoxy, Islam etc?
Click to expand...
Islam

Catholicism does not grant divorces to either men or women. Or if they do it is in limited situations. Catholicism grants annulments (meaning a sacramental marriage never existed).

Protestantism grants divorces although it used to place a stigma on those that got them. Protestantism does not view marriage as sacramental hence it allows divorces.

Orthodoxy grants divorces for certain reasons (e.g., a woman's husband becomes drug addicted), and it uses the power of economia given to the Bishops to do so, as marriage is one of their sacraments and man is not supposed to divide what God has joined as one. But out of mercy and the fact not all people have the sane situations, economia is practiced.



Some men, too many, have that attitude no woman let alone their wife can leave them. A control issue.

I can't deny there are men like that. You hear and read about them all the time.
Click to expand...
Number one reason for women to be murdered in US, IIRC, is trying to leave a spouse of BF.
 
FastPace said:
:lol: Oh, never mind. Somewhere along the lines some confusion developed, either along my line, your line, or maybe both our lines.

Sometimes, when I post in multiple threads in different sections of the board, I don't even remember 100% what a person is responding to in something earlier I posted.
Click to expand...

No worries
 
calamity said:
It covers many areas, I guess. Men with 20, 30, 100 partners are usually forgiven; women not so much. But, i'd say both have similar intimacy issues that either are or are not worked out over time.

I knew women with a wild past who eventually settled down; men who had a very quiet past that went wild later in life. A few guys I know started sleeping around around the age 40--some even discovered they liked men and decided to follow that route. All kinds of options exist out there. That's why I hesitate to judge solely on "how many people have you slept with?" responses.
Click to expand...

Unless I walked in their shoes, who am I to be anyone's judge. Everyone has a past. What we make of it is what counts.
 
calamity said:
At Least A Third Of All Women Murdered In The U.S. Are Killed By Male Partners | HuffPost
Click to expand...

A few points of interest.

1. The case for higher victims of domestic abuse against men is not based on actual criminal statistics, but from studies that talked directly to men and women about their domestic abuse experiences.

2. Nothing in that link supports you case since it doesn't compare those numbers back to other ways women get murdered.

3. The center for American Progress is a progressive advocacy organization and is thus not a valid source for the Huffington Post to use.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
A few points of interest.

1. The case for higher victims of domestic abuse against men is not based on actual criminal statistics, but from studies that talked directly to men and women about their domestic abuse experiences.

2. Nothing in that link supports you case since it doesn't compare those numbers back to other ways women get murdered.

3. The center for American Progress is a progressive advocacy organization and is thus not a valid source for the Huffington Post to use.
Click to expand...

Here's a better source.

Females made up 70% of victims killed by an intimate partner in 2007, a proportion that has changed very little since 1993.
Females are generally murdered by people they know. In 64% of female homicide cases in 2007, females were killed by a family member or intimate partner.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/10-facts-female-victims-violence
Click to expand...
 
Henrin said:
The whole idea is really foolish. She will leave with the kids, you will lose in family court, and when she needs the money she can just go to the government to get you to give her money. You're not creating leverage in any sort of way.
Click to expand...

Since women are the ones most likely to be murdered by an intimate partner, is that really a surprise?
 
calamity said:
Since women are the ones most likely to be murdered by an intimate partner, is that really a surprise?
Click to expand...

Domestic abuse does not account for the disparity in family court.
 
Henrin said:
A few points of interest.

1. The case for higher victims of domestic abuse against men is not based on actual criminal statistics, but from studies that talked directly to men and women about their domestic abuse experiences.

2. Nothing in that link supports you case since it doesn't compare those numbers back to other ways women get murdered.

3. The center for American Progress is a progressive advocacy organization and is thus not a valid source for the Huffington Post to use.
Click to expand...

There are more official studies...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1635092
 
I remember in a college class several years ago, we were taught the data indicates domestic violence among gay men in gay relationships is way higher than it is among men harming women in domestic violence.

Not sure what it would be for lesbians. I suspect dom women smacking the daylights out of their sassy mouth girlfriends is a lot higher than men hitting their girlfriends. Having known a number of lesbians I come to that conclusion--or image at least.




https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/11/a-same-sex-domestic-violence-epidemic-is-silent/281131/

Typical framing of partner abuse as a heterosexual issue—with men abusing women—does a disservice to victims in abusive homosexual relationships.
Click to expand...


Is violence more common in same-sex relationships? - BBC News

A study in the US suggests that same-sex relationships suffer higher levels of domestic violence than heterosexual ones. Why is this, and how are Americans dealing with the problem?
Click to expand...
"One of our startling findings was that rates of domestic violence among same-sex couples is pretty consistently higher than for opposite sex couples," says Richard Carroll, a psychologist and co-author of the report.
Click to expand...





Domestic violence at times, be it in a gay or heterosexual relationship, can be less one-sided. I say that because both parties can take turn initiating in violence. On one day the wife might yell and smack the guy with a pot across his head, then he jabs her in the face. A different day he might throw hands first.

There are of course circumstances in which it is clearly one sided and always have been. Those relationships. But the media gives to image those are the only relationships in domestic violence as a problem. Not true.
 
americanwoman said:
What, you don't want to stay and learn about why women are such slutty harpy feminists that no man want to marry them?
Click to expand...
I dont agree with that but i do think that a bias legal system is creating unintended negative consequences for women. Men are increasingly showing less interest in making women happy as are women toward men. Society is becoming increasingly naracistic. I really dont see any winners in the current enviroment

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
LowDown said:
So, tell me. Why would men get married? What's in it for them?
Click to expand...

Stability, security, and a bunch of legal and financial benefits. You're also likely to live longer, be happier

Here's a good overview of the legal and financial benefits.

And here's a good overview of the social benefits.

As far as the stability and security goes, that one's pretty simple. There are two of you. You have two sources of income. There are two people to help manage houeshold chores. If you get sick or hurt there's someone to take care of you. "But wait" you're about to say, "none of those things requires you to be married".

First off, not a lot of people, especially women, are on board with just dating indefinitely. At some point, if you want that relationship to continue, you're probably going to need to get married. And if you're already in a committed long-term relationship, why not get married to reap the other benefits? Sure, there are some risks to marriage, but you're greatly overstating them in the first place, and ignoring the fact that a lot of those risks can be mitigated.

The problem with marriage isn't the institution itself, it's the fact that a ton of people are getting married to the wrong people for the wrong reasons. So of course those marriages end badly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom