|
|
 |
Reply
| | | From: Old Coot (Original Message) | Sent: 12/12/2008 2:46 AM |
First off, I really do not understand the big deal with same sex marriage since as I recall that the biggest reason that I got married was to have legal legitimate kids. Flora and I have a very good relationship IMO and I really do not know just what part the marriage thingy has to do with it. What are the many things that I do not understand about marriage?
Second off, with all the concern with the environment these days, why has population control not come up. Let us face it, no people, no environmental issues. Fewer people, fewer environmental concerns.
oc...ok so i know that i am shallow minded .... |
|
 First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
Perhaps one of the chief reasons Neocons oppose Gay marriage, is a natural outcome of Gay marriage is how Neocons are made, They already believe their population is large enough, they are unwilling to share, and they don't want more competition. Neocon marriage and Gay marriage should both be encouraged for their contribution to population control, for the same reason. |
|
Reply
| | From:  _Xer | Sent: 12/12/2008 8:53 AM |
Coot, are you saying if society did not frown on kids born out of wedlock you would not have married Flora? 
I know several gay and lesbian couples who have children. The women usually have their own eggs fertilized from sperm banks. For gay men it is more complicated and difficult, so they generally have children from prior heterosexual marriages, or they adopt a child. Honestly, I have mixed feelings, and vacillate, about enabling gays to claim the word marriage for their relationships. This is for me a window into my own beliefs. Not sure how I feel about that either.
It was said on BBC the US population will double within the next 100 years. It has also been projected the global population will double in the year 2150 (from the current numbers). Without a major revolution in power production technology we won't survive the next 20 years, Food is going to become a major issue within that time also, but the next world war will probably be fought over water. Aside from war the largest decrease in human population will probably come from a pandemic, or series of pandemics. If you're lucky it won't happen within your lifetime, but I've absolutely no doubt it will happen in mine. For people who are genuinely concerned with global population, pollution, global warming and related issues, especially academicians, these issues are constantly under consideration, so I must assume you are referring to what is or not currently in the mainstream media spotlight when you query, "why has population control not come up?" It has come up, Coot, and sometimes I've heard it, so I KNOW it came up. |
|
Reply
| | | From: _Xer | Sent: 12/12/2008 8:55 AM |
| Pikes, you know when a horse is dead? We won, dude, they lost. We WON!!! |
|
Reply
| |
Pikes, Xer, here again my lack of the use of words comes through. First off, I do not oppose same sex marriage. The intended thrust of my first question was/is "just what does marriage bring to the table other than legal child birth?"
Second, why is population control a "taboo" subject? I am not for or against some form of population control, just think that it should be up for discussion.
oc...I often wonder just who are some of these neo-cons that Pikes seems to hate. In my dumbness, I would not know a neo-con if I saw one. What is their percentage of the USA population? |
|
Reply
| |
Coot, I think this marriage business has much to do with how a "lawfully married spouse" has several legal benefits that those who are unmarried lack. There are inheritance issues (if no Will is found, spouse gets all that the government doesn't,) Court testament issues (a legal spouse cannot be forced to testify against spouse,) Medical issues (only spouse can say turn off machines, or give permission for procedures,) and a few other issues that my coffee-deprived brain cannot conjur yet this morning.....  Population control leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I cannot help but think of China's "One Family One Child" business, and all the girl-babies that were killed so the family could try again for a more preferred boy child. I recognize that some kind of Population Control is necessary, especially in the less developed countries, but how the heck can it be accomplished fairly?  And I'm not sure I even know what a "neo-con" is? I understand the term to refer to some form of conservatives, but "neo" refers to "new" doesn't it? Perhaps Pikes will explain to us how a neo-con differs from a vanilla conservative..... |
|
Reply
| |
My definition of the neocon is a generally paranoid imbecile who is politically active and vocally loud, without substance, who is more concerned about what "others" do in their private lives, than common matters of real concern and substance that really do affect us all as a society. For example, global warming and climate change don't exist. The war in Iraq was just, and we're winning it. The US is under enormous threat from foreign terrorism, to the point where we need Homeland Security to feel safe enough to go to the store, and believe the trillions dollars price tag that is dragging down every other aspect of our economy is worth the cost. Gay marriage is a threat to American society and will undermine the institution of marriage. Self appointed people say so. Abortion is also a threat to American society. On both matters, God will abandon us. Since when does God ever tell anyone, to tell someone else what they should do? Xer is right to a point, but the horse isn't dead. The same ignorance is capable of erupting in a new form to back the shift in thought and power, if we are not individually and collectively diligent to tackle it, as we did in defeat of what McCain et al represented. Personal responsibility is the key here. If two people want to get hitched, hook up, and have legal benefits afforded two hitched people, let them. If they want to call it something else, let them. If a woman wants an abortion, let her get it, if she can. She has to live with the consequences. God knows, I taught enough kids whose parents didn't give a shit about them... kids whose parents would drop them off for their concert, and ask what time to come and pick them up... I think all of us here are pretty dang personally responsible, which is why the camaraderie. Ever visit a "board" infested with neocons? |
|
Reply
| |
Pikes, Xer, here again my lack of the use of words comes through. First off, I do not oppose same sex marriage. The intended thrust of my first question was/is "just what does marriage bring to the table other than legal child birth?"
OC, what a joy you are! From the many Gay and Lesbian individuals I know and work with regularly, their concern is based on legal rights, in which they are discriminated against by law and practice, through lack of recognition of a union, that denies them legal right making decisions concerning health, and estate. We all know marriage doesn't affect child birth. Children happen with or without marriage. As for the legality, maybe it's more appropriate for the term bastard to apply to the dead beat dad who scores and abandons, or the deadbeat mom who passes the child to her own parents to parent again, because the child interferes with her social life, instead of a mark on the child who had no say. |
|
Reply
| |
Marriage is a cultural institution...and religious for many but not all. As relationships tend away from "ownership" to relationship, marriage loses something that it promised: You belong to Me and I belong to You. There are legalities that married folk enjoy; however, there are also legal bindings. I attempted to make my children my primary beneficiarys (on my retirement policies), and that required my husband's permission! Now we are not the usual couple...I am, and have been for a long time, the primary wage earner...and I am required to ask him what I can do with my money. It's odd...it never occurred to me until that happened that marriage was restrictive in that regard as well as enabling. But there you have it. I guess I understand why gay and lesbian couples want the 'legitimacy' that marriage might grant, but I also think that they're allowing the conversation to continue in terms not theirs. They're allowing their relationships to be defined in heterosexual terms, and they're not heterosexual. It's rather like feminists using the language of the patriarchy to explain/defend feminism. It's nearly impossible, and nearly entirely futile to attempt to do so. If their relationships are different, then set their own definitions and terms. Then make the legalities follow...but if they want to be married...play here comes the Groom. |
|
Reply
| |
Thanks friends for all of the good info. I've never put much thought into the non-baby aspects of marriage 'til now since it seems to me to be a much bigger deal than I ever thought.
I was 26 knocking around with some "new" friends on Whidbey Is. They had been there for some time and knew where the females were. One day it occurred to me that if I wanted kids, I'd better get busy and find a wife. So I mentally made a "wife" specification and started a search. One of our hang outs on Saturday nights was a rather neat dance hall in a converted barn up in Burlington WA. Mostly Scandinavian music. I was (and still am) a very poor dancer, but that is where the females were. Anyway, my buddies and the usual gang of females plus one were there one Saturday night. I asked the "new" one for a dance. She was my equal on the dance floor. ho ho...Anyway a bit later the gang had a night beach party and you might guess who was there -- yep Flora. We spent a nice evening around the camp fire. It really was a great gang. I asked her for a Saturday date - ok. She had to do "duty" that evening at the town festival. While waiting for her to get off duty, I ended up at the bingo tent. Last game of the night was all participants stand and when one of your numbers was called, sit. Well you might guess who was the last one standing!..Won a biggie ham. So of course I gave the ham to Flora. I was invited to her home for a ham dinner. And the rest is -- well you know 54 good years of marriage. I still love ham. haha BTW, six weeks after meeting, we were engaged. I was off on an Alaska assignment for some many lonesome months. Back to Whidbey and we were married a few weeks after my 27 th BD. Ten months later, our first baby was born. Great experience.
oc...and that is my love story --- who's next? |
|
Reply
| | | From: _Xer | Sent: 12/12/2008 8:45 PM |
I mentally made a "wife" specification and started a search.
Literally brought tears to my eyes, so funny. Coot, that is so you. I'm still laughing!...OMG Neat story, bud. Thanks for sharing.
Not a lot I can really add to what's been said about marriage. So many have said so well, but I know gays/lesbians that really do want to own the term marriage along with the legal ramifications. They really feel their ‘alternative�?relationship is no difference from that between a man and a woman.
Funny story. Two kids we cared about got married. The large, very dominating female dressed as the groom. The more diminutive retiring female dressed as the bride. They were so cute/handsome! And, they were sweet kids. We enjoyed their ceremony and reception. Years later, after the 'groom' had gotten her graduate degree in physics and a good job, she gave up said job to become a mother of two. ~shock!~ The wife and I had always assumed the small one would be a mother, if it ever came to that.
In a hetero-relationship you can't choose who gets to be dad, and who gets to be mom. I have no problems with gays/lesbians being afforded the same legal guarantees as male/females, but the word 'marriage' simply has male/female connotations for me.
China's policy of one family one child is not at fault for the genocide against female babies there. Millennium of cultural indoctrination that makes people believe their sons will take care of them financially in their old age and their daughters will 'belong' to another family after marriage is the culprit. Sadly the killing of female babies has even been a recent phenomenon in India, and there is no strictly enforced birth limit there (unfortunately). I seem to recall being at a seminar in the last decade sometime where someone presented a paper claiming there was beginning to be a gradual decline in the birthrate in India, and the presenter felt the burgeoning middle class, since the opening of India's economy, was the deciding factor. As people become more secure in their own economic future they are less likely to feel a compulsion to have male sons ‘for the future.�?Hopefully this will bode well for female babies born in both India and China.
I think the term should be reserved for male members of the Bush oligarchy.
|
|
Reply
| | | From: _Xer | Sent: 12/12/2008 9:01 PM |
I think the term should be reserved for male members of the Bush oligarchy. (I just thought that beared(?) repeating)
For a really in depth exploration of the term neoconservative see Wikipedia’s entry. For me, I guess the main differences between a neocon and a true conservative have to do with the neocon’s taste for military adventurism as a means of promoting democracy globally, and the neocon’s willingness to support increased taxation to further those ends.
According to Marriam-Webster’s online dictionary neoconservative means:
1 : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
2 : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means
According to yourdictionary.com neoconservative means:
adjective
designating or of an intellectual, political movement that evolved in the late 1970s in reaction to liberal and leftist thought, advocating individualism (senses & ), traditional moral standards, anti-Communist foreign policy, etc.
noun
a neoconservative person
But, according to the in depth Wikipedia entry it goes back further. It’s an interesting read, but I’m not sure if I c/ped it here people would bother reading it, so I’ll leave it to you to go there to read. If anyone would like, I can certainly c/p it here though? Wikipedia entries do fluctuate from time to time.
--Xer
|
|
|
First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to General