Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tflabo
You mean like changing it to shack up?

Sorry, but marriag is between a man and I woman and nothing can and should change it.

If two men, or two women want to be good friends, I have nothing against it

13 posted on 06/21/2017 9:44:51 AM PDT by Kaslin (The harder thYou mean e conflict, the more glorious the triump. Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Kaslin

It’s all about standards and the results that are born from them.

Some countries allow polygamy. Some allow gay marriage. Some allow one or the other but not both.

The question is, what metrics should be used to measure the effectiveness or benefit to society for the different forms of marriage?

For me, there’s four:

- How well children do
- How rampant is disease
- How well people age
- We have enough children to continue the society

With this criteria evidence supports that the “best” standard is the one defined by Judeo-Christian ethics. Ideally, no sex before marriage, a faithful marriage between a man and a woman, and not divorcing. In thinking about it, if we were all willing to live this way we could eradicate every single STD, there would be no way for them to spread.

The gay community may not like it but all the CDC data points to rampant disease. Even “married” men, almost universally, continue to have additional partners outside of the marriage. As they make up ~1% of the population and have a lot more partners than heterosexuals any virus that makes its way into that sub-group will spread like wildfire. You could write a mathematical formula to represent it. A small group having lots of unprotected sex with many others within the same small group will spread disease unlike any other group, it only stands to reason.

Polygamy is not good for women. It’s a male desire. It just dilutes their worth as individuals, leading to being treated that way. The only “benefit” is that you can have a LOT of children very quickly. It’s no coincidence Islam allows it.

To believe all these different forms bring “equality” is absurd. It does no such thing, it just waters down the standard to the point of being meaningless. In the process, the four metrics I state get much worse. Liberals believe they can conjure up any reality they think “should be” and also think they won’t introduce consequences, they’re fools that think they’re enlightened. You cannot escape truth, they don’t think there’s such a thing.


16 posted on 06/21/2017 10:26:47 AM PDT by fuzzylogic (welfare state = sharing consequences of poor moral choices among everybody)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson