Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Dec 12 2004, 04:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Dec 12 2004, 04:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by The Familia@Dec 11 2004, 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Dec 11 2004, 08:25 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-The Familia
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
@Dec 11 2004, 07:51 PM
I'm old fashioned. I like tradition. Tradition in my opinion includes marriage as a bond between man and woman. Period end of story. Like I suggested in my earlier post, gay couples should not be allowed to celebrate the sacrament of MARRIAGE. Marriage is a bond between man and woman. Period end of story. What is there to argue? If a gay couple want some sort of union then go and create some alternative form, have some alternative celebration and means of doing it. Create a term for gay couples like gayrriage, or HB (Homosexuals Bonded). People can then walk around and say "hey guess what, Im getting HB'ed next week". They can have some sort of party or whatnot. The term marriage, the whole process of marriage is restricted to a man and woman in my opinion. Period end of story. There are rules and regulations for everything. Why does today's world constantly try to bend and alter rules, traditions and customs? Pretty soon this world is going to lose everything that is unique and traditional. Lets just throw tradition out the window shall we? This world has become ulta sensitive and people are always offended. I'm sorry, the world can't cater to everyones needs. Why must we alter something (the term, celebration etc. of marriage) that has been present for thousands of years. Create something new, don't try and steal something else.
|
You do know that marriage has changed drastically, fundamentally over the last couple hundred years, don't you? Change is nothing new.
We constantly try to bend and alter traditions because we like the tradition of bending and altering traditions. That is what we do. Look around for crying out loud. Did you ride a horse today? Are you saving up for a dowry? Are you saving yourself for marriage?
You (and others that have been involved in this argument) are claiming not much more than a word that you feel belongs to you. It's just a word.
Like I suggested in my earlier post, gay couples should not be allowed to celebrate the sacrament of MARRIAGE.
How about if it's not a sacrament and just a legal arrangement. Or does everyone have to be a catholic to get married.
Talk about your slippery slope -- I mean come on, when one religious group gets to decide something like this, what's next?
|
Thanks, Im quite aware change occurs throughout time. Your example of "bending traditions because we like to bend traditions" sounds a little silly. What kind of an example is that. Personally I never thought of riding a horse as traditional. We have developed other means of transportation, this has nothing to do with tradition. Marriage has existed for a long time, so have homosexuals. Why does it now have to become an issue. I don't recall to much attention 20 years ago or more about gay marriages. Why now? I don't see too many other countries or societies having this gay marriage debate. For many people words are more than just a word. If marriage is just a word, than why don't you create an alternative word. For some people this is a big deal, so why do you have to bother them? If you didn't read or understand my last 3 posts, I have clearly stated gay's should find an alternative form of union. Create something clearly of their own. A legal arrangment is fine, Im dealing more on a religious and traditional standpoint. You don't have to be catholic to be married. When did I state that? We are talking about the definition of marriage. Man and woman. Every religion and society can celebrate and do this differently according to custom. Marriage is not just catholic. Marriage is a man and woman though. End of story. Obviously these are my views and will not be changed.
|
Thanks, Im quite aware change occurs throughout time. Your example of "bending traditions because we like to bend traditions" sounds a little silly. What kind of an example is that.
It's not an example, it's a fact. It may sound silly to you but it's true.
Dowry exists heavily in Islamic society, as well many religious people do save themselves. Just because North American society has lost touch with tradition and such, doesn't mean other societies have. I don't see too many other countries or societies having this gay marriage debate.
We don't live in an Islamic society so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
I've run across a few "traditionalists" during this debate but I've yet to hear of one willing to admit that he's kept it in his pants in an effort to preserve the sanctity and tradition of marriage. Why is that? Tradition not good enough for you? Maybe the tradition and sanctity of the whole thing should only apply to other people?
Maybe it's time for some of you guys to put your money where your johnson is. Are you all for tradition and following all the old rules? Be a good boy, don't look don't touch, marry the gal your dad tells you to and pony up a few bucks to her dad, that kind of thing? I mean if you don't think we should break tradition then logically you would follow all the old rules wouldn't you?
It's obvious that you are quite fond of the phrase "end of story" but come on now, you know as well as I don that the story isn't over yet. [/b][/quote]
I'm not a traditionalist, I just don't believe gays should be married in churchs or at least catholic ones.