|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 2:03 pm
Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >>
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 6:06 pm
Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Men only wanted to marry virgins (originally) because that was the only way to make sure that she hadn't contracted an STI from someone (nvm what she may have been born with or got into her blood from a cut). To convince people to actually remain virgins loads of excuses sprouted up, to this day people honestly believe that women who aren't virgins will be terribly loose even though they go back to being tight in short order. Part of the reason non-virgin females had such a bad rap is that the only way an unmarried woman could make money was as a prostitute. I could go into more detail, but you get the picture?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 7:08 pm
Efstathios Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Well, you know... that and the whole... "having money to feed you and your baby" thing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 7:51 pm
NOCTVRNVS Efstathios Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Well, you know... that and the whole... "having money to feed you and your baby" thing That's what I meant by take care. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 11:45 pm
Efstathios NOCTVRNVS Efstathios Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Well, you know... that and the whole... "having money to feed you and your baby" thing That's what I meant by take care. Sorry. But my point is, do you have any idea what it takes for a single woman to be able to do that and live even now? Not much has changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:09 am
NOCTVRNVS Efstathios NOCTVRNVS Efstathios Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Well, you know... that and the whole... "having money to feed you and your baby" thing That's what I meant by take care. Sorry. But my point is, do you have any idea what it takes for a single woman to be able to do that and live even now? Not much has changed. "College first" helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 7:49 pm
Efstathios NOCTVRNVS Efstathios NOCTVRNVS Efstathios Sin-of-Malice Why? Mariage ain't a sudden STD or baby free barrier. I think that it's a bit odd to say it has to be for mariage...but I also don't think it should be thrown around. -shrug- >> Sex used to be saved for marriage because women couldn't work, if a woman was unmarried there was no one to take care of her baby. Well, you know... that and the whole... "having money to feed you and your baby" thing That's what I meant by take care. Sorry. But my point is, do you have any idea what it takes for a single woman to be able to do that and live even now? Not much has changed. "College first" helps. Sure... "helps"... My mum owns a successful store on a busy street in a town supported by year-round tourism where buying a house costs an average of $800,000... yet she wouldn't make enough money to support herself and her sons if she were not married to a veteran postie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 11:23 am
Key word "sons" note your use of plural...That's the problem. How many of you are there? You're not Morman, so I'm hoping at least less than six...?
A single income from a good college education should, theoretically support two people at a modest-though-sufficient quality of life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:34 pm
Efstathios Key word "sons" note your use of plural...That's the problem. How many of you are there? You're not Morman, so I'm hoping at least less than six...? A single income from a good college education should, theoretically support two people at a modest-though-sufficient quality of life. LOL!!! But really, yes, you could probably just get by as a single mother of one child if you had a college education. Then again, you could have at any other point in history as well. It's possible to live for absolutely free because nature is self-sufficient. There have always been single moms...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 8:09 pm
NOCTVRNVS LOL!!! But really, yes, you could probably just get by as a single mother of one child if you had a college education. Then again, you could have at any other point in history as well. It's possible to live for absolutely free because nature is self-sufficient. There have always been single moms... Once I finish college I will have an entry-level pay of about 460k annual. Possibly higher, by the time I'm finished. Course that'll take a while, it's an M.D. but I think that would be sufficient for a few people. I think my mom has a Masters degree, she has three kids, two of whom are severely disabled and one in college. She's a single mom and takes care of all three of us. Our house is about 200k so it's not a bad house or location, and she can afford to keep us all fed vegetarian foods. (she makes 80k annual) Single momness is fine for someone with an education. And you're not allowed to live for free, it's illegal. Thoreau got hit with tax evasion becaue he didn't pay any taxes the two years he lived at Walden. (I don't know what they expected him to pay taxes on...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 9:09 pm
Efstathios NOCTVRNVS LOL!!! But really, yes, you could probably just get by as a single mother of one child if you had a college education. Then again, you could have at any other point in history as well. It's possible to live for absolutely free because nature is self-sufficient. There have always been single moms... Once I finish college I will have an entry-level pay of about 460k annual. Possibly higher, by the time I'm finished. Course that'll take a while, it's an M.D. but I think that would be sufficient for a few people. I think my mom has a Masters degree, she has three kids, two of whom are severely disabled and one in college. She's a single mom and takes care of all three of us. Our house is about 200k so it's not a bad house or location, and she can afford to keep us all fed vegetarian foods. (she makes 80k annual) Single momness is fine for someone with an education. And you're not allowed to live for free, it's illegal. Thoreau got hit with tax evasion becaue he didn't pay any taxes the two years he lived at Walden. (I don't know what they expected him to pay taxes on...) Well although they would really really love to try, it's impossible to "evade" taxes that were never due in the first place... if you're not buying anything then you don't need to pay GST or PST (whatever you guys have); you don't have any electrical access to your house, you can't be charged hydro; etc. I would know, I live in Amish-land where everyone is living tax-free, except for their property taxes and whatnot. That said though, you could easily claim some unpopulated land in Alaska or Northern Canada and live there your entire life for not a single cent. I didn't say it was practical, my point was that many people have throughout history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 9:21 pm
confused What fun would that be?
I luffs my ipod and laptop and cellphone and guitar...Diseases of affluence! attatchment to material things! Make it go away!
We should go back to talking about sex, that was much more fun razz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 11:35 pm
... yeah, why AREN'T we talking about sex?
How did we get from sex, to the wilderness of North America... I'm scared
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 10:49 pm
Lol, yeah, back to sex.
You may be the only Christian left in this thread, so for the sake of convienence, I'll direct this at you. Don't take it personally wink
Would it be ok for a heterosexual couple who were committed and monogamous and unmarried to have sex in your opinion?
Because I think most of the debate is gone, so we might as well split hairs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 6:41 pm
Efstathios Lol, yeah, back to sex. You may be the only Christian left in this thread, so for the sake of convienence, I'll direct this at you. Don't take it personally wink Would it be ok for a heterosexual couple who were committed and monogamous and unmarried to have sex in your opinion? Because I think most of the debate is gone, so we might as well split hairs. Well I'll answer that by saying, I don't believe getting tagged with a "married" attribute is an exclusive license to sex. The word "married" means "joined" really, and these days marriage is more cultural than it is religious anyway. There is no real explanation from the Lord of what counts as "marriage" and I don't believe He expects us to pay a bunch of money and dress up in a Tuxedo so that we can call ourselves "married". I'll compare it to going to church for example -- God decreed His word, His instruction to us, in the book called the Bible, He put "teachers" here to guide us on the right path, and that's all we really need to understand His word. He does not expect us to "prove" our faith by going to a building created by man called a "church" just so we can say that we did. When we follow God's word and praise God, we are doing what He asks and He knows of our loyalty and prayer. Similarly, marriage is a promise between man, woman and God -- not an expensive occasion that requires a minister and a limousine. The promise we make, the promise of a man's eternal loyalty to a woman, is not made official or "proven" by the presence of hundreds of witnesses; the only audience must be God, and you don't have to go to a church or temple to find Him, He's a witness to everything we do. All that said, what I'm really getting to is that yes, I do think marriage should be prerequisite to sex, but as I have stated I have a very different view of the religious occasion of "marriage" than the current model that exists in American culture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
