#1
We all know the traditional definition of marriage:

The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.

is outmoded and bigoted, and that people who defend it are akin to racists. What is the new definition of marriage? Is it two people who really love each other a whole lot? Is it any contract between two (and only two) consenting non-related individuals that involves any of sexual, romantic, child-rearing, or family-uniting activities?

I think this has to be decided before the old version can be stamped away completely.
#2
I've yet to hear a convincing argument from liberals as to why gay marriage is acceptable but polygamy isn't
#3
[account deactivated]
#4

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

I've yet to hear a convincing argument from liberals as to why gay marriage is acceptable but polygamy isn't


#5

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

I've yet to hear a convincing argument from liberals

#6
i've yet to come.
#7
The object-cause of the desire would be that strange imperfection which disturbs the balance, but if you take it away the desired object itself no longer functions, i. e., it is no longer desired. It is a paradoxi­cal obstacle which constitutes that towards which it is an obstacle. It is in these terms that we can also understand the nature of the melancholic position. A melancholic is some­ body who has the object of desire but who has lost the desire itself That is to say, you lose that which makes you desire the desired object.
#8

babyfinland posted:

The object-cause of the desire would be that strange imperfection which disturbs the balance, but if you take it away the desired object itself no longer functions, i. e., it is no longer desired. It is a paradoxi­cal obstacle which constitutes that towards which it is an obstacle. It is in these terms that we can also understand the nature of the melancholic position. A melancholic is some­ body who has the object of desire but who has lost the desire itself That is to say, you lose that which makes you desire the desired object.



Easy upvotes

#9
marriage as a concept is p well defined by islam but so is seperation of church and state. unions between all people, as far as taxes are concerned, should be free of gender and religious conotation (but maybe not quanity) or should not exist. it's pretty clear and to say otherwise is kafir bullshit
#10
The definition of marriage is a poosandwich. It is made of ass and poo
#11
marriage is like a box of chocolets.... if u dont share it between more than 2 ppl u get rly fat!!
#12
Marriage is like the Führerprinzip: One person gives all the orders!
#13
The state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two.
#14
Mawwiage. Mawwiage is what bwings us togethaw today.
#15
this is gonna be my wedding reception
#16

WeedSmoker420 posted:

We all know the traditional definition of marriage:

The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.

that's not the traditional definition of marriage.

there's plenty of recorded evidence of polygyny, polyandry, and gay marriages long before the modern day.

#17
monogamy is the most prevalent form of marriage world wide.
#18

babyfinland posted:

The object-cause of the desire would be that strange imperfection which disturbs the balance, but if you take it away the desired object itself no longer functions, i. e., it is no longer desired. It is a paradoxi­cal obstacle which constitutes that towards which it is an obstacle. It is in these terms that we can also understand the nature of the melancholic position. A melancholic is some­ body who has the object of desire but who has lost the desire itself That is to say, you lose that which makes you desire the desired object.



Sounds like my marriage!

#19
cycloneboy will you marry me aromatically?
#20
[account deactivated]
#21

girdles_gone_wild posted:

monogamy is the most prevalent form of marriage world wide.

that's just because it's very difficult, statistically, to pull off a society where most marriages are poly.

#22
[account deactivated]
#23
[account deactivated]
#24
Historically many societies were idyllic, matriarchal, genderless, and unalienated, and conveniently fell right before any written record of their ever existing could take place. However deep in the recesses of our reptile brain the remnants of a life serving our cream pie queen still lingers on...
#25
[account deactivated]
#26
[account deactivated]
#27

tpaine posted:

me and tom are reading these forums together and i thought it would be funny to reply like that, like i'm talking to him through text instead of with my voice. he wanted me to post this message as a clarification, because i guess that post seems weird. we are about to hit the old country buffet at 7838 Telegraph Road, Taylor, MI, that part is true and not a ruse. i will try but fail to eat healthy, grabbing some collard greens and a little caesar salad at first, coquettishly, but i will break down and go for the macaroni cassarole and ribs eventually. tom's over that shit, he goes right to the good stuff. we've eaten together enough times for me to know, man does not play with his buffet. i could never be the eater he is.



same but funny/not gay

#28
im jus playin. unlike tom when it comes to the beltbuster burger at dairy queen.
#29
[account deactivated]
#30
[account deactivated]
#31
how do i trick someone into marry
#32

carnegie posted:

how do i trick someone into marry

veneer of humanity

#33

carnegie posted:

how do i trick someone into marry



5 The people grieved for Benjamin, because the Lord had made a gap in the tribes of Israel. 16 And the elders of the assembly said, “With the women of Benjamin destroyed, how shall we provide wives for the men who are left? 17 The Benjamite survivors must have heirs,” they said, “so that a tribe of Israel will not be wiped out. 18 We can’t give them our daughters as wives, since we Israelites have taken this oath: ‘Cursed be anyone who gives a wife to a Benjamite.’ 19 But look, there is the annual festival of the Lord in Shiloh, which lies north of Bethel , east of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.”

20 So they instructed the Benjamites, saying, “Go and hide in the vineyards 21 and watch. When the young women of Shiloh come out to join in the dancing, rush from the vineyards and each of you seize one of them to be your wife. Then return to the land of Benjamin. 22 When their fathers or brothers complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Do us the favor of helping them, because we did not get wives for them during the war. You will not be guilty of breaking your oath because you did not give your daughters to them.’”

23 So that is what the Benjamites did. While the young women were dancing, each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife. Then they returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and settled in them.

#34

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

I've yet to hear a convincing argument from liberals as to why gay marriage is acceptable but polygamy isn't



well, what if there's a really buff dude and he keeps hogging up all the women, and nobody else has women left. think before you post.

#35
check your privilege, premise_checker94
#36
i have none
#37
w/r/t the q in the op: man + lady. thank you and god bless.
#38

Tsargon posted:

Jews are white.



I agree.

#39

premise_checker94 posted:

i have none



wow, lucky

#40

Tsargon posted:

w/r/t the q in the op: man + lady. thank you and god bless.

lol nice, way to internalize Roman cultural norms. you know they conquered and murdered and raped our ancestors, right? let's not let them tell us how to behave.