dk

Michael: Excuse me, but that's a mighty sweeping statement.
I have the idea that marriage came about partly as a way to control property rights via inheritance.
dk: Most people didn’t own much in the way of property until the 20th Century.

Michael: Also, you can't have divorce and adultery exist before the institution of marraige, as they are both defined by marriage (one is the dissolution of marriage, and the other is sexual relations outside of marriage).
dk: I’m not being a smart-ass, but exactly. The institution of marriage forced people to make a commitment, because otherwise they skipped out on their obligations.

Michael: That leaves you with proving your assertion that absentee fathers and abusive mothers were a direct cause for people to sit down and say "gee fellows, I've got this idea that I call "marraige" that I think we should bring about".
dk: I don’t follow you, without marriage people courted disaster doing as they pleased, with whomever they pleased.

Michael: Citing your sources for your assertions above would be a nice thing to do.
dk: Sure, Bronislaw Kasper Malinowski, 1884-1942, Professor of Anthropology. His works included... The Family among the Australian Aborigines, 1913; Primitive Religion and Social Differentiation (in Polish), 1915; The Natives of Mailu, in Trans. of the RS of S. Australia, 1915; Baloma: the Spirits of the Dead in the Trobriand Islands, in Journ. of R. Anthrop. Inst., 1916; Argonauts of the Western Pacific, 1922; Magic Science and Religion, in Science, Religion and Reality, 1926; Crime and Custom in Savage Society, 1926; articles Anthropology in Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 1926 (13th ed.); Social Anthropology, Kinship, Marriage in 14th ed. 1929; Myth in Primitive Psychology, 1926 (Chinese translation,1935); The Father in Primitive Psychology, 1927; Sex and Repression in Savage Society, 1927 (Chinese transl. 1937); The Sexual Life of Savages in NW Melanesia, 1929 (translated since into French, German, Spanish Polish and Italian); Coral Gardens and their Magic, 2 vols, 1935; The Foundations of Faith and Morals (Riddell Memorial Lectures 1934-1935), 1936; articles in Nature, Psyche, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Man, Atlantic Monthly; etc.

Jinto

Does anyone else here find it wholly unsurprising that all of dk's sources were written before 1950?

Jinto

Funny, it doesn't show.

And considering that your argument depends on confusing gay people with the "gay community" or "gay culture," that makes you a... (hint: it's a five letter word beginning with b)

Actually, religous institutions work far better, but I digress...

No, actually there would still be a need for laws, there just wouldn't be a need for law enforcement. But anyway, I have some questions:

1. How the hell can you have divorce and adultery without marriage? Please explain your convoluted "logic" here.
2. Why are these greater factors than, say, simply keeping track of who's child was who in an age long before the invention of paternity tests?
3. How has marriage actually helped to decrease the number of absentee fathers and abusive mothers?
4. Do you feel that it is healthy or even acceptable for couples to act outside of their assigned gender roles within the normal confines of marriage (i.e. the mother works and the father stays at home?)
5. Are you ever going to answer my original question as to what you find personally offensive about gays and gay marriage?

dk

A child's need for their mother and father supersede what a gay wants. A child's need for a clear moral compass supersedes what a gay wants. The needs of children oblige all good people, and that includes gays.

My liberty ends where your freedom begins.

You're pro semantic-gymnastics, What you call the Defense Department, I call the War Department. Gays have no right to people's children, they have an obligation like everyone else.

Gay culture is burdened with promiscuous and pornograpphic values, so gays need to clean up their act before making claims upon children.

dk

Imagine this from a microbes perspective. Anal sex bypasses the first and second lines of defense to provide microbes a superhighway with direct access to the most succulent body tissues, in a densely populated community that frequently shares a diseased immune system. Where else can microbes afford an university education to improve themselves in an environment un-oppressed by nasty immune responses. MDR microbes are the true beneficiaries of the creative juices that flow within the gay community, and gay people that practice promiscuous anal sex their gracious hosts.

Nowhere357

I was wondering. If a person won't answer direct questions, and makes constant bigoted statements, is it fair to say that the person holds opinions of no value?

dk

A very good observation. I do tend to look for sources with clear vision confirmed by a history of reliable service. In my experience the cutting edge and the bleeding edge are synonymous.

Kimpatsu

Ever heard of a condom?

Jinto

A child's need for parents is not at odds with the existance of gay marriage. In cases where marriage exists without children, it is not even an issue. In cases where gays choose to adopt, I believe that it is invariably better than the alternative, which is being left in the states convoluted foster care system. So, gay marriage is not at odds with a child's need for parents.

A child's need for a clear moral compass is also not at odds with gays. As you have been adamantly clear, there is a difference between your proclaimed gay culture and the actual values of gay people. In particular: a gay person who actually values marriage probably does not hold the "promiscuous and pornographic" values that you ascribe to gay culture. And again, this is not even an issue in gay marriages absent children. So, gay marriage is not at odds with a child's need for a clear moral compass.

And what is it with your consistent implication that gay people are predators after people's children?0

And the exact probability of a person who values promiscuity and pornography actually being allowed to adopt a child, gay marriage issues aside, is...? (hint: the value is LARGER for heterosexuals than it is for homosexuals, due to the probable prejudices of the evaluator).

dk

Yes, I find condoms a fascinating study. For the last 20 years the NEA, AFT, Planned Parenthood, a mob of gay associations etc... have been broadly publicized condoms as a reliable means to "safe sex". Yet I become confused when I read about the high incidence rates of the diseases they are supposed to prevent. Since condom advocates claim to have reliable results from controlled laboratory studies, I must conclude the controlled studies don't accurately duplicate the conditions that exist in the real world. What do you think?