Marriage...

Bill's forum was the first! All subjects are welcome. Participation by all encouraged.

Moderator: Available

benzocaine
Posts: 2107
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 12:20 pm
Location: St. Thomas

Post by benzocaine »

To the person who didn't want to be quoted,

My heart goes out to you man :(

So much I want to say about your situation but will refrain..

Also..I f you don't want you know who knowing where you've been erase your history and also download Microsofts anti spyware program. It's free and will erase any traces of where you've been. :roll:
User avatar
Redbeard
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:48 am
Location: Humboldt, AZ

Post by Redbeard »

I agree with Ben

My heart goes out to no quote and I have a lot of respect for you for sticking in there.
jorvik

Post by jorvik »

Seems to me that there are two discussions going on here.one is about "Marriage" and the other is about Marriage in the Christian tradition. Christians don't allow Homo sexual marriages, but then they wouldn't recognise a Buddhist marriage or an Islamic one either :lol: :lol: .....I think a Christian marriage can be Homosexual.I mean didn't Jesus say that we should love our fellow Man :? :? .........personally ( as one who is made in God's likeness) I have discernment, I can read about the Bible historically, make my Judgements rationally, and reach my own decisions about Homosexuals or whatever, whomever....the Bible has been heavily edited, the oldest thing in the new testement is the letters of Paul, the oldest Gospel is that of Mark.the new testement has been re-shuffled many times to promote the viewpoint of different factions within Christianity.however my father in heaven has given me the ability to see that 8) 8) ...nobody said Religion was easy, God created math and science and that isn't easy..sure it's easy to follow a dogma and shout phrases......and we would be unhappy if Islamics did it.but hey they believe in one God , and so do I ...we just have different names for him as do the Jews....Buddhists just think about the oneness with God.....at the end of the day the world is a cold and lonely place to live without someone to love, if it happens to be of the same sex, so what............I read this in a Sociology Book.a kid brought up by a syphalitic whore mother and a drunk father...who was he? Beethoven :lol:
I'm sure that folks who love each other are better role models than folks who don't, many homosexuals struggle with their sexuality .....what about folks brought up with homosexual parents ( it has happened Animatronics from " the sissor sisters".great band by the way.love them 8) )
wouldn't they struggle? also??
by that token.suppose that you brought up by Godless parents...why should you accept Christianity???.Islamics don't ( I don't mean Godless, I mean that they call their "one God" a different name form our "one God" ..but there is only one God :lol: :lol: ..so go figure....I think that maybe the "one God " is the God of homosexuals as well :wink:
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

Rich wrote: I recently read some stats in a recent study on this and the situation is not really that bad. It should really read 'half of new marriages fail', new being somewhat recent. If you take the total exisiting marriages and throw the 'half of new marriages' number into the mix it does not look that bleak. On top of that, the trend for the succuss of new marriages has improved and half no longer end in divorce. That is a statistic from the nineties.

I cannot remember the actual figures but will look around for them.
"Half of all marriages fail" is not a bad approximation, Rich. Understand though that we're always behind time in measuring this. Only in retrospect can we do a "true" measure.

It's tricky. You see, a marriage today goes on until death do they part (in the future) or not (in the future). And that gap varies from marriage to marriage. Meanwhile, a divorce today represents a marriage from the past. And how far in the past varies from divorce to divorce.

The best mathematical way to look at it today is like a mass balance equation. You have married couples going in. You have divorced couples going out. You have deaths going out (one partner in a marriage dies). And what you have inside the "compartment" are the total number of marriages. So with that model, you CAN measure the marriage rate, the divorce rate, and the total number of marriages at a single point in time.

From the CDC, we know the following for the year 2001.
Number of marriages: 2,327,000

Marriage rate: 8.4 per 1,000 total population

Divorce rate: 4.0 per 1,000 population

(46 reporting States and D.C.)
So like I said, not a bad approximation. And yes, this is not static.

- Bill
Guest

Post by Guest »

Strawman don't recall strawmen on the K bash do you van sensei?

Image

Do remember discussing the book or film Van? What is George saying? Possibly we discussed it on one of the many deleted posts and I just missed it. It's inconvient when people change history, I'll always be left wondering if I missed out on a great conversation.

Then again maybe someone is just flaming us again.
benzocaine
Posts: 2107
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 12:20 pm
Location: St. Thomas

Post by benzocaine »

To the unnamed poster, in response to what Redbeard says, I respect you weather you stuck it out or not. Earlier I posted that I felt marriage was compromise and both needed to work at it. Well sometimes that's not possible. Other times it is.
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

To honor George's request, I've created a thread for those (Ian, Ethan, anyone else) to continue the discussion specifically on sexual orientation issues.

GLB issues in marriage

This is "avaialable" so we don't sidetrack the main thread on marriage.

And anyone who feels there are remaining issus on the strawman and/or the K-bash, here's a place you can continue those issues.

Strawman, K-Bash, and Other Fun Issues

Again, it's there only if you feel there are unresolved issues.

And if you'd rather express these feelings in a more general thread, check out one that Dana started.

the mighty word

On with the thread. 8)

- Bill
IJ
Posts: 2757
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Location: Boston
Contact:

Post by IJ »

Redbeard, don't worry too much about me. I've had death threats, hate mail, slander campaigns, and the occasional physical assault because of who I am, and this really isn't getting me bent out of shape. I just was stating I found some of your comments inappropriate.

You have stated that homosexual parents are bad for kids / society
You have stated we probably have genetic defects although that doesn't excuse our behavior
You have put us in the company of people who burn kids with cigarettes and others who harm society.

You've not supported these comments with any objective evidence, just as the data backing up your psychological theory is your limited personal observation. I've mostly limited myself to countering your attacks and since I've made no broad criticisms of your slice of society, their ability to raise children, or proposed limiting their civil rights etc, I'm not sure what facts you'd like me to provide. Let me know, I'll come up with something. I said little about the book you promoted, as well--and let citations make most of my case.

Here's my major point: you want to strip the rights of a segment of society away? You better come prepared with facts. I haven't seen any, yet. Awaiting response.

GEM makes a good point about thread morphing... and yeah the only way I see this related to marriage failure is that coercing people with one sexual orientation to try to live the life of someone of another sexual orientation is going to fail in a large way unless the person is lucky and falls more to the middle of the spectrum. IMHO.
--Ian
User avatar
Oldfist
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:29 pm

Post by Oldfist »

IJ wrote:Redbeard, don't worry too much about me. I've had death threats, hate mail, slander campaigns, and the occasional physical assault because of who I am, and this really isn't getting me bent out of shape. I just was stating I found some of your comments inappropriate.

You have stated that homosexual parents are bad for kids / society
You have stated we probably have genetic defects although that doesn't excuse our behavior
You have put us in the company of people who burn kids with cigarettes and others who harm society.

You've not supported these comments with any objective evidence, just as the data backing up your psychological theory is your limited personal observation. I've mostly limited myself to countering your attacks and since I've made no broad criticisms of your slice of society, their ability to raise children, or proposed limiting their civil rights etc, I'm not sure what facts you'd like me to provide. Let me know, I'll come up with something. I said little about the book you promoted, as well--and let citations make most of my case.

Here's my major point: you want to strip the rights of a segment of society away? You better come prepared with facts. I haven't seen any, yet. Awaiting response.

GEM makes a good point about thread morphing... and yeah the only way I see this related to marriage failure is that coercing people with one sexual orientation to try to live the life of someone of another sexual orientation is going to fail in a large way unless the person is lucky and falls more to the middle of the spectrum. IMHO.
Ian (and everyone else), George has requested that this discussion be moved to VSD and Bill started a thread there. Please, continue there.

Thanks,
John
IJ
Posts: 2757
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Location: Boston
Contact:

Post by IJ »

Didn't see Bill's post. Started working on mine before his appeared, and finished it later.
--Ian
Post Reply

Return to “Bill Glasheen's Dojo Roundtable”