Judge States Traditional Marriage Was Polygamy

[Steven_R]

The judge is ruling for all of us, Peach. Tis what tis.

The social con far right outcasts no longer dictate marriage law.

No she isn't. she is ruling for a small minority that wants immorality.
This nation has been going down this road since the 1960's and we have continued to go downhill as a nation.
Children having sex at 11 and 12 years old. Children having children.
Mass Murder's has risen since the 1990's.
God taken out of our schools.
Government debt at 17 Trillion.
We have the most devise President we have ever had.

The standards people have when differentiating between right and wrong and good and bad. Values people have include things such as honesty, compassion, courage, integrity, fairness and respect.
We no longer have these.

Your vision of America is rejected by the majority that want marriage equality

Your vision of America is overwhelmingly rejected by the millenials.

None of the stuff above you mention has anything to do with marriage equality.

The majority don't want "marriage equality"; they just don't care what homosexuals do. Apathy isn't acceptance.

 

[USNavyVet]

Christians were doing it wa-aaay before Muslims.

Know your history.

What Christians were polygamists? Maybe the Mormons if they can be considered Christian. Anyone else?

Middle Ages:

In the medieval period, multiple wives were often obtained through kidnapping. It is with this in view that we must interpret the following laws: The Frankish Laws of 818-9 strictly forbade kidnapping of women.[33] The XXVII. law issued by King Stephen I of Hungary (1000–1030) declares that the kidnapper must return the woman to her parents even if he has had sexual intercourse with her, and must pay a penalty to the parents. According to the Hungarian law, the kidnapped girl was then free to marry whomever.[33]

The Roman councils of 1052 and 1063 suspended from communion those laymen who had a wife and a concubine at the same time.[34] Divorce was also forbidden, and remarriage after a divorce counted as polygamy. Nicholas the Great (858-67) forbade Lothair II of Lotharingia to divorce his barren wife Teutberga and marry his concubine Waldrada, with whom he had several children. After a council of the Lotharingian bishops, as well as the archbishop of Köln and Trier had annulled his marriage to Theutberga, the pope voided this decision, and made him take his wife back.[35][36]

In Scandinavia, the word for an official concubine was "frille". Norwegian Bishop Øystein Erlendsson (ca. 1120-1188) declared that concubines were not allowed to accept the sacraments unless they married, and men were forced to promise marriage to women they had lain with outside of wedlock. In 1280, the Norwegian king Eirik Magnusson (1280–99) declared that men were exempted from having to promise marriage to the frille, if they went to confession and did penance. The Church answered by making several declarations in the 14th century, urging men to marry their concubines. In 1305, King Håkon V (1299–1319) issued a law that declared marriage to be the only lawful way of cohabitation, and declared that only women in wedlock were allowed to dress as they pleased, while the dress of concubines was restricted.

Reformation period:

While monogamy was the norm among Christians,[38][39] in the 16th century there was a Christian re-examination of plural marriages. The founder of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther wrote: "I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter."[40]

You haven't an d can't show that polygamy was the norm or as available to the common individual. Kidnapping women does not constitute polygamy.

 

[USNavyVet]

Who says it was widely practiced? Only the wealthy had multiple wives.

You said it wasn't. That's only an opinion. No one has to refute it until you offer evidence for it. You have not done that.

When a debater calls for an opinion to be refuted by the opponent is an admission of loss.

I see your white flag and accept your surrender.

 

[USNavyVet]

Christians were doing it wa-aaay before Muslims.

Know your history.

What Christians were polygamists? Maybe the Mormons if they can be considered Christian. Anyone else?

You are illiterate on the subject.

https://www.google.com/#q=Christian+polygamy

Look it up. Study the history.

You're still an asshole no matter how many times you stomp your feet. You have as yet to show that polygamy was the norm. Read the OP and come back.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What Christians were polygamists? Maybe the Mormons if they can be considered Christian. Anyone else?

Middle Ages:

In the medieval period, multiple wives were often obtained through kidnapping. It is with this in view that we must interpret the following laws: The Frankish Laws of 818-9 strictly forbade kidnapping of women.[33] The XXVII. law issued by King Stephen I of Hungary (1000–1030) declares that the kidnapper must return the woman to her parents even if he has had sexual intercourse with her, and must pay a penalty to the parents. According to the Hungarian law, the kidnapped girl was then free to marry whomever.[33]

The Roman councils of 1052 and 1063 suspended from communion those laymen who had a wife and a concubine at the same time.[34] Divorce was also forbidden, and remarriage after a divorce counted as polygamy. Nicholas the Great (858-67) forbade Lothair II of Lotharingia to divorce his barren wife Teutberga and marry his concubine Waldrada, with whom he had several children. After a council of the Lotharingian bishops, as well as the archbishop of Köln and Trier had annulled his marriage to Theutberga, the pope voided this decision, and made him take his wife back.[35][36]

In Scandinavia, the word for an official concubine was "frille". Norwegian Bishop Øystein Erlendsson (ca. 1120-1188) declared that concubines were not allowed to accept the sacraments unless they married, and men were forced to promise marriage to women they had lain with outside of wedlock. In 1280, the Norwegian king Eirik Magnusson (1280–99) declared that men were exempted from having to promise marriage to the frille, if they went to confession and did penance. The Church answered by making several declarations in the 14th century, urging men to marry their concubines. In 1305, King Håkon V (1299–1319) issued a law that declared marriage to be the only lawful way of cohabitation, and declared that only women in wedlock were allowed to dress as they pleased, while the dress of concubines was restricted.

Reformation period:

While monogamy was the norm among Christians,[38][39] in the 16th century there was a Christian re-examination of plural marriages. The founder of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther wrote: "I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter."[40]

You haven't an d can't show that polygamy was the norm or as available to the common individual. Kidnapping women does not constitute polygamy.

You obviously don't understand the point the judge made.

 

[Seawytch]

The marriage equality has passed in only three states, not sure if the majority is for marriage equality.

You can surely read polls, can't you?

Half of Americans say gay marriage is a constitutional right

 

[Seawytch]

What Christians were polygamists? Maybe the Mormons if they can be considered Christian. Anyone else?

You are illiterate on the subject.

https://www.google.com/#q=Christian+polygamy

Look it up. Study the history.

You're still an asshole no matter how many times you stomp your feet. You have as yet to show that polygamy was the norm. Read the OP and come back.

Probably because it wasn't "the norm" for most people, just the wealthy ones...which is one of the main reasons polygamy falls out of favor in democracies. It WAS traditional and fully sanctioned.

 

[BobPlumb]

Could this be the slippery slope that many have been warning about?

 

[Seawytch]

Could this be the slippery slope that many have been warning about?

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

 

[BobPlumb]

Could this be the slippery slope that many have been warning about?

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

 

[Seawytch]

Could this be the slippery slope that many have been warning about?

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Actually, it's just the opposite. "Tradition" isn't a viable argument and Polygamy is "traditional". It did nothing to the Polygamy door, but it DID shoot down "tradition" arguments.

I don't really care one way or the other about Polygamy. I did enjoy "Big Love" and would be happy to make Julie Andrews a sister wife.

 

[BobPlumb]

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Actually, it's just the opposite. "Tradition" isn't a viable argument and Polygamy is "traditional". It did nothing to the Polygamy door, but it DID shoot down "tradition" arguments.

I don't really care one way or the other about Polygamy. I did enjoy "Big Love" and would be happy to make Julie Andrews a sister wife.

The current 78 year old Julie Andrews, or the young Julie Andrews as she was in Sound Of Music?

 

[Seawytch]

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Actually, it's just the opposite. "Tradition" isn't a viable argument and Polygamy is "traditional". It did nothing to the Polygamy door, but it DID shoot down "tradition" arguments.

I don't really care one way or the other about Polygamy. I did enjoy "Big Love" and would be happy to make Julie Andrews a sister wife.

The current 78 year old Julie Andrews, or the young Julie Andrews as she was in Sound Of Music?

Either or both. She still looks pretty spectacular for 78...and she's rich as hell

 

[BobPlumb]

Actually, it's just the opposite. "Tradition" isn't a viable argument and Polygamy is "traditional". It did nothing to the Polygamy door, but it DID shoot down "tradition" arguments.

I don't really care one way or the other about Polygamy. I did enjoy "Big Love" and would be happy to make Julie Andrews a sister wife.

The current 78 year old Julie Andrews, or the young Julie Andrews as she was in Sound Of Music?

Either or both. She still looks pretty spectacular for 78...and she's rich as hell

Mary Poppins is a hot nanny!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Could this be the slippery slope that many have been warning about?

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Did banning polygamy open the door for banning monogamy?

 

[BobPlumb]

No. The judge was not arguing for polygamy, but against those that believe "tradition" to be a reason to deny gays and lesbians marriage equality.

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Did banning polygamy open the door for banning monogamy?

Non sequitur

 

[Seawytch]

But doesn't that just open the door a little wider for polygamy? And if there were a movement for polygamy to be legal, would you be for it or against it?

Did banning polygamy open the door for banning monogamy?

Non sequitur

So is Polygamy in relation to gay marriage equality.

 

[BobPlumb]

Did banning polygamy open the door for banning monogamy?

Non sequitur

So is Polygamy in relation to gay marriage equality.

If the concept is that people should be able to marry who that want to marry then many of same arguments in support of gay marrige would apply for polygamy. Why shouldn't 3 or more people be able to form a marriage unit? Are other types of marriage harmed if this is allowed?

 

[BobPlumb]

Why should someone who is bisexual be not be able to have marriage partners of both sexes?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Middle Ages: In the medieval period, multiple wives were often obtained through kidnapping. It is with this in view that we must interpret the following laws: The Frankish Laws of 818-9 strictly forbade kidnapping of women.[33] The XXVII. law issued by King Stephen I of Hungary (1000–1030) declares that the kidnapper must return the woman to her parents even if he has had sexual intercourse with her, and must pay a penalty to the parents. According to the Hungarian law, the kidnapped girl was then free to marry whomever.[33]

The Roman councils of 1052 and 1063 suspended from communion those laymen who had a wife and a concubine at the same time.[34] Divorce was also forbidden, and remarriage after a divorce counted as polygamy. Nicholas the Great (858-67) forbade Lothair II of Lotharingia to divorce his barren wife Teutberga and marry his concubine Waldrada, with whom he had several children. After a council of the Lotharingian bishops, as well as the archbishop of Köln and Trier had annulled his marriage to Theutberga, the pope voided this decision, and made him take his wife back.[35][36]

In Scandinavia, the word for an official concubine was "frille". Norwegian Bishop Øystein Erlendsson (ca. 1120-1188) declared that concubines were not allowed to accept the sacraments unless they married, and men were forced to promise marriage to women they had lain with outside of wedlock. In 1280, the Norwegian king Eirik Magnusson (1280–99) declared that men were exempted from having to promise marriage to the frille, if they went to confession and did penance. The Church answered by making several declarations in the 14th century, urging men to marry their concubines. In 1305, King Håkon V (1299–1319) issued a law that declared marriage to be the only lawful way of cohabitation, and declared that only women in wedlock were allowed to dress as they pleased, while the dress of concubines was restricted.

Reformation period: While monogamy was the norm among Christians,[38][39] in the 16th century there was a Christian re-examination of plural marriages. The founder of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther wrote: "I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter."[40]

You haven't and can't show that polygamy was the norm or as available to the common individual. Kidnapping women does not constitute polygamy.

You obviously don't understand the point the judge made.

navy vet is one of those far right loons who has a philosophy to which he twists and mistwists and ignores facts to that philosophy.

Then he will challenge you to refute him.

On this issue, the judge will always be right and navyvet always wrong.