Let the sliding begin

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
"Polygamy rights is the next civil-rights battle," says Mark Henkel, who, as founder of the Christian evangelical polygamy organization TruthBearer.org, is at the forefront of the movement. His argument: if Heather can have two mommies, she should also be able to have two mommies and a daddy."
Click to expand...

Deja Vu?

Newsweek
 
Personally, I don't see the big deal about polgamy/andry, as long as all parties are willing/not being exploited. The difference between something like polygamy and bestiality is the small notion of consent. Consenting, willing adults versus taking advantage of a helpless animal? :shrug:
 
I didn't ask my dog's consent before having it's reproductive track yanked out either.

Bop, not to be offensive, but you just proved the point I made way back in the gay marriage threads. Once you start pushing back borders, something that was eyond the realm of silly suddenly isn't so far fetched. Some folk want to call it progress. I call it one step closer to the edge. In the past 2 years, I, or someone else, has posted articles right here about someone marrying a corpse, a dog, and children.

Right here, right now. You tell me. Where do you accept that the line should be drawn today?
 
Consenting willing adult Homo sapiens sapiens. That's where the line is drawn for me. Sure, I may not be comfortable about polygamy/andry, but only because that's not for me. :shrug:
 
So, for you, the corpse and dog were over the line? It's already been done. You can't object to that. The precedent is already set.
 
BeardofPants said:
Consenting willing adult Homo sapiens sapiens. That's where the line is drawn for me. Sure, I may not be comfortable about polygamy/andry, but only because that's not for me. :shrug:
Click to expand...
Yuppety.
 
Professur said:
So, for you, the corpse and dog were over the line?
Click to expand...

Yup, yup. Bestiality, paedophilia, necrophilia, they all cross the line. Why? Cos they're not consenting adults. Simple 'nuff?
 
BeardofPants said:
Yup, yup. Bestiality, paedophilia, necrophilia, they all cross the line. Why? Cos they're not consenting adults. Simple 'nuff?
Click to expand...

So (and please don't get offended by this) why should your definition of the boundries and limits of acceptable marriage be respected? By what authority do you pronounce those limits as just?
 
BeardofPants said:
Personally, I don't see the big deal about polgamy/andry, as long as all parties are willing/not being exploited. The difference between something like polygamy and bestiality is the small notion of consent. Consenting, willing adults versus taking advantage of a helpless animal? :shrug:
Click to expand...
 
Professur said:
So (and please don't get offended by this) why should your definition of the boundries and limits of acceptable marriage be respected? By what authority do you pronounce those limits as just?
Click to expand...

With what authority do you pronounce limits and don't give me that bull about "current laws on the books" because everyone knows that can change. Also, no running behind the god flag either because gods are a dime a dozen.

BoP is right Bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia involves a form of rape due to it being non-consensual.
 
It all goes back to the 'values' this country being "founded" on being compromised.
Yep, the slope is already slicker than owl-shit.
 
BeardofPants said:
Just statin' my on contribution to the thread, prof. And don't worry, I'm not getting offending by your fishing. :p
Click to expand...


I'm not fishing. I'm pointing out that you have limits that you consider reasonable, by your reasoning. I have mine. They have theirs.

When I touted mine, I was called homophobic and intollerant.


I wonder what you'll be called.
 
ekahs retsam said:
With what authority do you pronounce limits and don't give me that bull about "current laws on the books" because everyone knows that can change. Also, no running behind the god flag either because gods are a dime a dozen.

BoP is right Bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia involves a form of rape due to it being non-consensual.
Click to expand...

And after all that, you've still said nothing.
 
Hmm... The polygamy discussion has been argued for thousands of years but now it's the queer's fault. Have I got that right?
 
Professur said:
And after all that, you've still said nothing.
Click to expand...

what the hell are you talking about Prof.?

I asked you what authority you claim and you said absolutely nothing. Well I'm starting to see a trend in your arguments. You say ridiculous inflammatory statements not biased in reality then when someone calls you on it you either ignore them or you claim others have no authority and yet you can't seem to provide evidence of your authority... :tardbang:

BoP has every right to state her opinion and derives the same authority to draw the line where she wishes that you do. If you deny her the right to do so you deny yourself the same right.
 
Old socially accepted norms are being pushed back, it happens. First we treat women are equals, Now what the general population considers "right" is being challenged, I think I am on the consenting adults bandwagon, now if a religious association says no, fine, no marriage IN THAT CHURCH, but the goverment should ok it, etc.

Polygamy, while I don't understand why anyone would want more than one wife, at once, what is the real problem with it if everyone is willing? I think hte goverment problem with it is the tax parts.
 
paul_valaru said:
Old socially accepted norms are being pushed back, it happens. First we treat women are equals, Now what the general population considers "right" is being challenged, I think I am on the consenting adults bandwagon, now if a religious association says no, fine, no marriage IN THAT CHURCH, but the goverment should ok it, etc.

Polygamy, while I don't understand why anyone would want more than one wife, at once, what is the real problem with it if everyone is willing? I think hte goverment problem with it is the tax parts.
Click to expand...


and insuance etc...
 
ekahs retsam said:
what the hell are you talking about Prof.?

I asked you what authority you claim and you said absolutely nothing. Well I'm starting to see a trend in your arguments. You say ridiculous inflammatory statements not biased in reality then when someone calls you on it you either ignore them or you claim others have no authority and yet you can't seem to provide evidence of your authority... :tardbang:

BoP has every right to state her opinion and derives the same authority to draw the line where she wishes that you do. If you deny her the right to do so you deny yourself the same right.
Click to expand...

Ha. You see nothing. Try reading for a change.

BoP stated where she would put the line. I've already made my opinion of where the line belongs clear. Also, why I would put it there. She stated why too.

The conversation hinges not on the line, or the reason, but the authority. My 'authority' was overruled and deridded, even though it derived from centuries of tradition. I was asking where hers found it's roots, as it didn't allow for certain cases of marriage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top