Australian Politics Forum - The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #75 - Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:49pm

Soren wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:36pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

I'm guessing the concept of church run same-sex marriages upsets your religious sensibilities?

They were not marriages. They were ceremonies whereby they become brothers, explicitly stressing the spiritual nature of the bond. Grafting gay sexual fetishes onto this is anachronistic and totally contrary to any evidence. Even Boswell avoids identifying these relationships as sexual.

It is ludicrous to insinuate that monastic orders introduced same sex marriages (but not heterosexual marriages) in open ceremonies. Just eyewateringly, arseseepingly ridiculous.

Is your relationship with your best friend sexual? No. Nevertheless, it is a same-sex relationship. Male friendship, female friendship are same-sex relationship but that doesn't mean that they are thereby or therefore sexual relationships.

No, but we also haven't had a church service declaring us 'brothers' either...

I suggest you read page 317 at this amazon link..

http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Unions-Premodern-Europe-Boswell/dp/0679751645?tag...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #76 - Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:55pm

Soren wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:36pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

I'm guessing the concept of church run same-sex marriages upsets your religious sensibilities?

They were not marriages. They were ceremonies whereby they become brothers, explicitly stressing the spiritual nature of the bond. Grafting gay sexual fetishes onto this is anachronistic and totally contrary to any evidence. Even Boswell avoids identifying these relationships as sexual.

It is ludicrous to insinuate that monastic orders introduced same sex marriages (but not heterosexual marriages) in open ceremonies. Just eyewateringly, arseseepingly ridiculous.

Is your relationship with your best friend sexual? No. Nevertheless, it is a same-sex relationship. Male friendship, female friendship are same-sex relationship but that doesn't mean that they are thereby or therefore sexual relationships.

Actually, no one is suggesting that there weren't heterosexual marriages.

What's ludicrous is the suggestion that homosexuality is a new (modern concept) and that same-sex unions/marriages were first thought of in the 1970's....

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #77 - Jan 10^th, 2014 at 4:17pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:55pm:

Actually, no one is suggesting that there weren't heterosexual marriages.

What's ludicrous is the suggestion that homosexuality is a new (modern concept) and that same-sex unions/marriages were first thought of in the 1970's....

Really? When were they thought of (other than by a mad Roman mperor and by a gay English professor misreading and misunderstanding medievel Easter Orthodox theology and rituals).

"Similar blood brotherhood rituals were practiced by other cultures, including American Indians, ancient Chinese as well as Germanic and Scandinavian peoples."
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brotherhood#Scandinavia

Homosexual acts are not new. Identifying openly as a homosexual, let alone as 'gay', leading a 'gay lifestyle' is new.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #78 - Jan 10^th, 2014 at 5:20pm

Soren wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 4:17pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 3:55pm:

Actually, no one is suggesting that there weren't heterosexual marriages.

What's ludicrous is the suggestion that homosexuality is a new (modern concept) and that same-sex unions/marriages were first thought of in the 1970's....

Really? When were they thought of (other than by a mad Roman mperor and by a gay English professor misreading and misunderstanding medievel Easter Orthodox theology and rituals).

"Similar blood brotherhood rituals were practiced by other cultures, including American Indians, ancient Chinese as well as Germanic and Scandinavian peoples."
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brotherhood#Scandinavia

Homosexual acts are not new. Identifying openly as a homosexual, let alone as 'gay', leading a 'gay lifestyle' is new.

It might have been 'new' in Ancient Sumeria (but I doubt it), but it's nowhere near to 'new' nowadays...

"Archaeologists in the Czech Republic have unearthed the grave of what may be the remains of the oldest known homosexual or transgender man.

The prehistoric body dates to the Copper age -- or 2900 to 2500 years ago -- and was buried in a manner that was typically reserved for women.

The male skeleton was found on its side, facing east, and was surrounded by domestic jugs, objects previously seen only in female graves. An oval, egg-shaped container, usually associated with female burials, was also found at the feet of the skeleton.

"From history and ethnology, we know that people from this period took funeral rites very seriously, so it is highly unlikely that this positioning was a mistake," lead archaeologist Kamila Remisova Vesinova told the U.K.'s Telegraph."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/oldest-gay-man/story?id=13320808

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 34279
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #79 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 8:54am

Quote:

"Archaeologists in the Czech Republic have unearthed the grave of what may be the remains of the oldest known homosexual or transgender man.

The prehistoric body dates to the Copper age -- or 2900 to 2500 years ago -- and was buried in a manner that was typically reserved for women.

The male skeleton was found on its side, facing east, and was surrounded by domestic jugs, objects previously seen only in female graves. An oval, egg-shaped container, usually associated with female burials, was also found at the feet of the skeleton.

Yep .... dead give away everytime Grin

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #80 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:02am

Gnads wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Quote:

"Archaeologists in the Czech Republic have unearthed the grave of what may be the remains of the oldest known homosexual or transgender man.

The prehistoric body dates to the Copper age -- or 2900 to 2500 years ago -- and was buried in a manner that was typically reserved for women.

The male skeleton was found on its side, facing east, and was surrounded by domestic jugs, objects previously seen only in female graves. An oval, egg-shaped container, usually associated with female burials, was also found at the feet of the skeleton.

Yep .... dead give away everytime Grin

Actually, yes it is. Prehistoric burials were often extremely particular and ritualised.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

... Gold Member Offline Posts: 23673 WA Gender:	Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news) Reply #81 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:14am Are you going anywhere with this gizmo? Cos it sounds like after years of (fallaciously) saying how the church shouldn't dictate who gets to marry, you're now looking to the same church as a beacon of progress. A bit of clarification, please.
Back to top	In the fullness of time... IP Logged

... Gold Member Offline Posts: 23673 WA Gender:	Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news) Reply #82 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:18am Plus, it bears little relation to your original statement: Quote: it's only been considered a heterosexual one for the last several hundred years.
Back to top	In the fullness of time... IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #83 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:34am

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

Are you going anywhere with this gizmo?

Cos it sounds like after years of (fallaciously) saying how the church shouldn't dictate who gets to marry, you're now looking to the same church as a beacon of progress.

A bit of clarification, please.

No, not a beacon of progress, more like a beacon of hypocrisy.

The stuff I posted is to challenge and knock down the idea that the current views on same-sex marriages/civil unions are relatively recent, and based purely on the dictates of the Christian churches and were very very different through most of human history.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #84 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:43am

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:18am:

Plus, it bears little relation to your original statement:

Quote:

it's only been considered a heterosexual one for the last several hundred years.

Sure it does. There have been same-sex unions (either marriage or civil) all through history (and prehistory, which the 'oldest gay burial' link indicates), and it's only been in the last 500 to 800 years (hence 'several') that society has considered marriage heterosexual only.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #85 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 11:19am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:34am:

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

Are you going anywhere with this gizmo?

Cos it sounds like after years of (fallaciously) saying how the church shouldn't dictate who gets to marry, you're now looking to the same church as a beacon of progress.

A bit of clarification, please.

No, not a beacon of progress, more like a beacon of hypocrisy.

The stuff I posted is to challenge and knock down the idea that the current views on same-sex marriages/civil unions are relatively recent, and based purely on the dictates of the Christian churches and were very very different through most of human history.

This is silly (but you knew that).

For the sake of argument, lets just assume that the rate of homosexuality has remained constant for all time. Estimates are ~2-3%.

Now lets assume that they all got married. For what reason we can only imagine, since it serves none of the historical reasons for marriage, save "an expression of love" which was unheard of before the 1800's....but well gloss over that for now.

So you end up with a 97-98% rate of marriage being heterosexual in nature. With that kind of proportion, nobody could honestly say it's not a "heterosexual instituion" could they?

This is what runs me about this site - you're all more interested in being a obstinate fools, than actually advancing an argument.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 11^th, 2014 at 11:26am by ... »

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #86 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 11:25am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:43am:

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:18am:

Plus, it bears little relation to your original statement:

Quote:

it's only been considered a heterosexual one for the last several hundred years.

Sure it does. There have been same-sex unions (either marriage or civil) all through history (and prehistory, which the 'oldest gay burial' link indicates), and it's only been in the last 500 to 800 years (hence 'several') that society has considered marriage heterosexual only.

That's an extreeeeeeeeemely long bow to draw.

You have some fanciful interpretations by a homosexual professor and a dude buried with an egg, therefore homosexual marriages (which serve no point at all) have been conducted althroughout history.

You're about as objective as that Botwell character.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #87 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 12:09pm

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 11:19am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:34am:

... wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

Are you going anywhere with this gizmo?

Cos it sounds like after years of (fallaciously) saying how the church shouldn't dictate who gets to marry, you're now looking to the same church as a beacon of progress.

A bit of clarification, please.

No, not a beacon of progress, more like a beacon of hypocrisy.

The stuff I posted is to challenge and knock down the idea that the current views on same-sex marriages/civil unions are relatively recent, and based purely on the dictates of the Christian churches and were very very different through most of human history.

This is silly (but you knew that).

For the sake of argument, lets just assume that the rate of homosexuality has remained constant for all time. Estimates are ~2-3%.

Now lets assume that they all got married. For what reason we can only imagine, since it serves none of the historical reasons for marriage, save "an expression of love" which was unheard of before the 1800's....but well gloss over that for now.

So you end up with a 97-98% rate of marriage being heterosexual in nature. With that kind of proportion, nobody could honestly say it's not a "heterosexual instituion" could they?

This is what runs me about this site - you're all more interested in being a obstinate fools, than actually advancing an argument.

Well from things I've read, an estimate of 2-3% is very low. Closer to 8-10% (and that's only an average, possible higher depending on society). If you'd actually read the link, you realise that it's not 'based on a dude buried with an egg'. That dude is simply the oldest burial like that that's been found.

It's apparently not uncommon to find similar burials. To qoute from the article:

"Men in many cultures throughout history have occupied a sort of liminal space between the two sexes: They would dress and act like women, but that behavior would have no bearing on their sexual orientation or who they slept with. These "third-gender" people, said Arnold, were sometimes even accorded special spiritual or shaman status in their societies.

Homosexuality Is as Old as Mankind

"This is not an uncommon phenomenon in prehistoric cemetery populations," said Arnold. "It's always there, but in small percentages."

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news)
Reply #88 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 12:34pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2014 at 12:09pm:

"Men in many cultures throughout history have occupied a sort of liminal space between the two sexes: They would dress and act like women, but that behavior would have no bearing on their sexual orientation or who they slept with. These "third-gender" people, said Arnold, were sometimes even accorded special spiritual or shaman status in their societies.

I'm sure homosexuals and other...outliers have been around for a long time, that's not being disputed. What is in dispute is that "(marriage has) only been considered a heterosexual one for the last several hundred years.

Saying there have been....outliers and they were often "shamans" just shoots that argument in the foot. Shamans were often forbidden to marry.

A modern example of this "she/he" thing is the faafafines of samoa. Boys brought up as women....yet if they marry, it's always to a woman. Why do you think that is? Go on, answer honestly, it'll save a helluva lot of fooking around.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

... Gold Member Offline Posts: 23673 WA Gender:	Re: The Anti-Marriage Equality Lobby (latest news) Reply #89 - Jan 11^th, 2014 at 12:35pm .
Back to top	In the fullness of time... IP Logged