More ABORTION restrictions coming ........RUSSIA (As predicted)

[Peikko 1,575]

Procreation is the fundamental expectation of marriage? Whoa there Danno, wrong, again.

[Danno 1,228]

Procreation is the fundamental expectation of marriage? Whoa there Danno, wrong, again.

For five minutes put on you thinking cap.

Go look up the laws concerning marriage in your state.

If you can conclude that Marriage its self and the laws surrounding it are not primarily focused on Children and property, I can't help you.

[Peikko 1,575]

For five minutes put on you thinking cap.

Go look up the laws concerning marriage in your state.

If you can conclude that Marriage its self and the laws surrounding it are not primarily focused on Children and property, I can't help you.

I don't need any help. You are the one making stupid statements.

[GandD 5,966]

For five minutes put on you thinking cap.

Go look up the laws concerning marriage in your state.

If you can conclude that Marriage its self and the laws surrounding it are not primarily focused on Children and property, I can't help you.

For someone who claims to present a lot of stats and facts, you sure are suggesting a lot of inferring on this one. Couldn't that also be because a lot of married people tend to have kids?

[JohnR! 5,495]

I don't need any help. You are the one making stupid statements.

For someone who claims to present a lot of stats and facts, you sure are suggesting a lot of inferring on this one. Couldn't that also be because a lot of married people tend to have kids?

The fundamental flaw the other poster is making here is that in his opinion he believes people only get married in order to have children or that getting married carries within itself the obligation to produce offspring. The notions itself is not too far fetched if you were to hop on a time machine and headed back to the 16th century.

[Peikko 1,575]

The fundamental flaw the other poster is making here is that in his opinion he believes people only get married in order to have children or that getting married carries within itself the obligation to produce offspring. The notions itself is not too far fetched if you were to hop on a time machine and headed back to the 16th century.

At which time women were no more than chattels and had no rights. That being the point that was being made, modern societies have started to give women the same rights and privileges previously only enjoyed by men, like universal suffrage, equal opportunity in employment (if not in pay), independent incomes etc etc etc. Making married women seek permission from their husbands prior to having an abortion is a step in the opposite direction. Who knew?

[JohnR! 5,495]

If you can conclude that Marriage its self and the laws surrounding it are not primarily focused on Children and property, I can't help you.

The laws of marriage stem from a time when women carried dowries and children were considered a duty for any couple. Women no longer represent an avenue by which to expand one's land, nor does one need a male heir whose birth right guarantees a dynasty. That is not even true in England anymore.

[JohnR! 5,495]

At which time women were no more than chattels and had no rights. That being the point that was being made, modern societies have started to give women the same rights and privileges previously only enjoyed by men, like universal suffrage, equal opportunity in employment (if not in pay), independent incomes etc etc etc. Making married women seek permission from their husbands prior to having an abortion is a step in the opposite direction. Who knew?

I know right? You guys can vote, work and drive; and now you want to decide what you can do with your own bodies without asking permission to your husband. What is the world coming to!? What next? Women will demand to make as much money as men?!?!?

[Danno 1,228]

For someone who claims to present a lot of stats and facts, you sure are suggesting a lot of inferring on this one. Couldn't that also be because a lot of married people tend to have kids?

Well of course.

That was my point, without children, there is no need for marriage. Marriage historically is so intertwined with the rearing and care of kids that to suggest it has any prominent purpose outside of kids makes no sense.

In other words, because of kids... we have a tradition. Naturally people who are not going to have kids sometimes "follow the tradition" but there is no real purpose to it when a contract would do just was well.... and maybe better.

The move to "no fault" divorces is what has caused so much confusion, it has also been the source of the collapse of marriage as an "Institution."

My parents generation viewed marriage differently, I just caught on to this a few years ago.

They talked about saving or wrecking "The marriage." People were committed to "The marriage." not so much to a person.

Infidelity broke the bond of MARRIAGE.

My generation looks at is as - him and her- and the commitment they have to "each other."

He or she "cheated on ME.

Lets take a look at how that change effected the stability of marriage.

No Fault spread state by state from the 60's to 1980.

You see a large WW2 spike and then very low rates until no fault divorce kicked in.

By 1980 the rate of divorces settles a bit as Marriage its self declines and the option to shack-up is more and more acceptable.

Notice the WW2 spike in marriage.

[Peikko 1,575]

Well of course.

That was my point, without children, there is no need for marriage. Marriage historically is so intertwined with the rearing and care of kids that to suggest it has any prominent purpose outside of kids makes no sense.

In other words, because of kids... we have a tradition. Naturally people who are not going to have kids sometimes "follow the tradition" but there is no real purpose to it when a contract would do just was well.... and maybe better.

The move to "no fault" divorces is what has caused so much confusion, it has also been the source of the collapse of marriage as an "Institution."

My parents generation viewed marriage differently, I just caught on to this a few years ago.

They talked about saving or wrecking "The marriage." People were committed to "The marriage." not so much to a person.

Infidelity broke the bond of MARRIAGE.

My generation looks at is as - him and her- and the commitment they have to "each other."

He or she "cheated on ME.

Lets take a look at how that change effected the stability of marriage.

No Fault spread state by state from the 60's to 1980.

You see a large WW2 spike and then very low rates until no fault divorce kicked in.

By 1980 the rate of divorces settles a bit as Marriage its self declines and the option to shack-up is more and more acceptable.

Notice the WW2 spike in marriage.

As an opinion on modern marriage and its value to society as a whole it just completely and utterly sucks. People marry now and have always married for lots of reasons, only one of which is to provide a stable environment for children. As has been suggested, instead of getting all these unrelated stats and opinions form the internet, if you are interested in this subject and want to form informed opinions on it take a class.

[Danno 1,228]

As an opinion on modern marriage and its value to society as a whole it just completely and utterly sucks. People marry now and have always married for lots of reasons, only one of which is to provide a stable environment for children. As has been suggested, instead of getting all these unrelated stats and opinions form the internet, if you are interested in this subject and want to form informed opinions on it take a class.

Actually, I am trying to offer you a class, you don't seem to appreciate the lesson.

You don't bring me an apple, you don't say "Thanks" you make me feel less than appreciated.

[Peikko 1,575]

Actually, I am trying to offer you a class, you don't seem to appreciate the lesson.

You don't bring me an apple, you don't say "Thanks" you make me feel less than appreciated.

I wonder why? Oh, right, that would be because you don't know anything, you are just making it up.

[GandD 5,966]

Well of course.

That was my point, without children, there is no need for marriage.

Naw man, say what you want. I married my wife because I want us to be together for the rest of our life. If we have kids, cool, if not, cool.

Marriage is about companionship. Kids are a result of companionship and no birthcontrol.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

[Danno 1,228]

That bumper sticker highlights the dirty little secret. That if it could ever be proven that Gays are really designed that way genetically, they would be testing for it and guess what that would mean for a whole lot of people? (Abortion time)

Don't kid yourself either.

You know how Libs love Blacks so much yet when it comes to buying a house and getting a good deal .... how they pass right over those good deals to get in a "Good school district" (code word for- whiter)

I'm betting their hypocrisy doesn't end at where they live....

the same thing would be true with having a kid. DO they really want their only child to be gay?

I gotta feeling the only pregnancies testing "gay" which might see the light of day would be from Christian families (ironically) ..... you know the same ones who decline aborting kids who are retarded or might have health problems?

Cool bumpersticker,

would love to "see" how the Left answers the question.